To Remove Any Search Results From Page 1 of Google:

Visit PAGE1.ME for more information.
Many Internet defamation cases are lost because they use 19th century discovery processes for a 21st century problem. It is possible to inexorably link anonymous or otherwise unverifiable social networking profiles to suspects in relatively short order. Furthermore it can be done without the expense and delays associated with depositions, subpoenas, and other glacial processes that often result in perished evidence.
As an example, in “Tom Corbett vs Twitter”, the now governor of Pennsylvania, while he was Atty. Gen. convened a grand jury in order to compel Twitter to reveal the identities of two tweeters who were staunch critics of his performance, Namely CasablancaPA and BFBarbie. Some have alleged this action cost more than $100,000 of taxpayers money, and tied up 5 attorneys. It is my understanding that Twitter gave notice to the two Doe defendants, who in turn advised their followers of the threat. The quarrel went viral and objective observers would probably conclude that Mr. Corbett ended up with a considerable amount of egg on his face.
Furthermore, Twitter did not comply and a great hullabaloo ensued and an outpouring of public support for the anonymous tweeters. It is my understanding that Twitter never revealed the identities and Mr. Corbett quickly dropped the pursuit. I couldn’t resist the challenge and began a little assessment of the case while I was on a support call for some new software we were trying. I was on hold for about 20 min. in total and in that time was able to track down one of the tweeters namely