Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-20-2019, 08:47 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,352

Why is that Covington student able to sue for $250 million when the right lies endlessly


https://abc13.com/society/covington-catholic-student-sues-washington-post-for-$250m/5147068/

All the WaPo did was post a video recording of him acting like a douchebag.

The right wing media outlets lie endlessly. Why aren't they sued into nothingness? Fox news, alex jones, etc should have been sued into oblivion by now.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 02-20-2019 at 08:48 PM.
  #2  
Old 02-20-2019, 08:48 PM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 20,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
All the WaPo did was post a video recording of him acting like a douchebag.

The right wing media outlets lie endlessly. Why aren't they sued into nothingness? Fox news, alex jones, etc should have been sued into nothingness by now.
I don't think Smirky McSmirkface is going to get a nickel. He was in a public place and has no expectation of privacy.
  #3  
Old 02-20-2019, 08:48 PM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 6,218
Anyone can sue for anything.

The purpose of the lawsuit is not to actually win against the Washington Post, but to establish the family as victims and get them on the path to receiving some sweet wingnut welfare. That kid is going to college for free, at the very least.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 02-20-2019 at 08:49 PM.
  #4  
Old 02-20-2019, 08:54 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,352
Well I hope the WaPo doesn't settle and uses this to teach the right a lesson.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #5  
Old 02-20-2019, 09:04 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 8,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Well I hope the WaPo doesn't settle and uses this to teach the right a lesson.
What would that lesson be? That wearing a hat is sufficient to be threatened with death by loony celebrities and loony nobodies in part due to libelous representation? I think the so-called right is already sufficiently aware of the deranged nature of the easily triggered rabid left.
  #6  
Old 02-20-2019, 09:13 PM
mhendo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
I don't think Smirky McSmirkface is going to get a nickel. He was in a public place and has no expectation of privacy.
I don't think that he'll win his lawsuit either, but it has basically nothing to do with whether or not he was in a public place, and nothing to do with whether he had an "expectation of privacy."

The lawsuit is not for violation of privacy. It is an action for defamation. The only extent to which the issue of privacy is relevant is that Sandmann's lawyers define him in the lawsuit as a "private figure for the purposes of this defamation action, having lived his entire life outside of the public eye."

What this means is that he has a lower threshold to meet in order to prove defamation than a public figure. Under New York Times v. Sullivan, public figures have fewer protections against defamatory statements; public figures seeking to win defamation suits have to show that not only was the statement false, but that the person who published it had actual knowledge, or demonstrated reckless disregard, of its falsehood.

Last edited by mhendo; 02-20-2019 at 09:15 PM.
  #7  
Old 02-20-2019, 09:14 PM
Covfefe's Avatar
Covfefe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 815
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
What would that lesson be? That wearing a hat is sufficient to be threatened with death by loony celebrities and loony nobodies in part due to libelous representation? I think the so-called right is already sufficiently aware of the deranged nature of the easily triggered rabid left.
Until they take the partisan blinders off it will never occur to them that the WaPo did anything wrong.

The worst part is there was no great mystery. They they had access to video footage of everything that happened from day one. They had it and Nathan Phillips swept at least a few of them up off their feet.
  #8  
Old 02-20-2019, 09:38 PM
Morgyn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: In the time stream
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
What would that lesson be? That wearing a hat is sufficient to be threatened with death by loony celebrities and loony nobodies in part due to libelous representation? I think the so-called right is already sufficiently aware of the deranged nature of the easily triggered rabid left.
And yet, it's the right-wing nuts who are actually trying to murder people they perceive as enemies of Trump and conservatism. With one exception (the shooting 18 months ago at the Republican baseball practice), all the acts of violence I've heard about since Trump was elected that are related to politics are perpetrated by right-wing nuts against liberal/progressive office holders or journalists.

And you say we're deranged.

Y'know, octopus, I've largely ignored your postings because outside of political threads you seem to be an okay person. I think I'm going to go to actually ignoring you now, though, instead of just scrolling past.
  #9  
Old 02-20-2019, 10:21 PM
nate is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 838
Did the WaPo provide non-editorial commentary on the video? I don't remember.
  #10  
Old 02-20-2019, 10:24 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 5,473
I'm not sure how they are going to claim that all of the damages Sandmann suffered were due to the Post's story. The post only reported the story because it was all over social media and they were hardly the only News organization to do so. If anyone were culpable it would be the person who took the video or Youtube. But since Trump has made the Washington Post his personal enemy, Sandmann thinks he take this the the MAGAbots and be on the GoFundMe gravy train. Meanwhile the Hemmer Defrank Wessels Law Firm gets a whole bunch of free publicity, which will probably have died down by the time the lawsuit gets thrown out.

I assume that they are trying to convince people that this is just the same as the suit by the Sandy Hook parents against Alex Jones, but unlike the Washington post Alex Jones really did play a primary roll in riling people up against the plaintiffs.

Last edited by Buck Godot; 02-20-2019 at 10:28 PM.
  #11  
Old 02-20-2019, 11:08 PM
Mr Downtown is offline
Chicago Savant
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,400
Complaint can be read here for great amusement.

The heart of the libel claim:

51. On January 19, 20 and 21, the Post ignored the truth and falsely accused Nicholas of, among other things, “accost[ing]” Phillips by “suddenly swarm[ing]” him in a “threaten[ing]” and “physically intimidat[ing]” manner as Phillips “and other activists were wrapping up the march and preparing to leave,” “block[ing]” Phillips path, refusing to allow Phillips “to retreat,” “taunting the dispersing indigenous crowd,” chanting “build that wall,” “Trump2020,” or “go back to Africa,” and otherwise engaging in racist and improper conduct which ended only “when Phillips and other activists walked away.”

The defamation claim is pp. 19-21, and is that the Post published, without independently verifying their truth, quotations from Nathan Phillips about what happened on the Mall.

Seems likely the lawsuit will get tossed at the first serious hearing, for failing to state a claim under modern libel law. But the Trumpeters will get to bleat for months and months about how the MSM destroyed this poor lad's life.
  #12  
Old 02-20-2019, 11:30 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 24,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
Seems likely the lawsuit will get tossed at the first serious hearing, for failing to state a claim under modern libel law. But the Trumpeters will get to bleat for months and months about how the MSM destroyed this poor lad's life.
Don't forget the most important thing: it will justify to them, even more than now, that Trump packing the courts with conservative judges is not only justified but necessary.
  #13  
Old 02-21-2019, 02:42 AM
Mr. Nylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Bed
Posts: 3,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Godot View Post
I'm not sure how they are going to claim that all of the damages Sandmann suffered were due to the Post's story. The post only reported the story because it was all over social media and they were hardly the only News organization to do so. If anyone were culpable it would be the person who took the video or Youtube. But since Trump has made the Washington Post his personal enemy, Sandmann thinks he take this the the MAGAbots and be on the GoFundMe gravy train. Meanwhile the Hemmer Defrank Wessels Law Firm gets a whole bunch of free publicity, which will probably have died down by the time the lawsuit gets thrown out.

I assume that they are trying to convince people that this is just the same as the suit by the Sandy Hook parents against Alex Jones, but unlike the Washington post Alex Jones really did play a primary roll in riling people up against the plaintiffs.
Your amusing conclusions are drawn from an incomplete knowledge of the facts.
  #14  
Old 02-21-2019, 03:30 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 35,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Nylock View Post
Your amusing conclusions are drawn from an incomplete knowledge of the facts.
Interesting, then, that you didn't post any of those supposed additional facts, huh?

-----

Often, I will simply say stuff like "if you have actual reasons, post them." But I'm not feeling so charitable today, so I'm just going to call this what it is: A deceitful practice.

This is a short, confident but unbacked statement that uses an obvious truism to push a particular point of view.

Being short means it will be automatically read. Being confident creates the illusion of winning and making it seem like you must have a reason for your statement. But not giving that reason leaves it not open to debunking.

And then statements like "an incomplete knowledge of the facts" are always true to some extent. No one can ever possibly have all facts. As such, it serves as a way to confirm the "amusing conclusions" claim, which clearly implies the conclusions are very far off. And it is, of course, derisive, which continues the "confidence" thing I mentioned earlier.

-----

Of course, there are tactics to be used against what I said. One is just to ignore me, and hope that people ignore my post since I'm not particularly well-liked. (It's also indistinguishable from not having come back to the thread or deciding the topic has moved on if you do come back.) Another is to accuse me of overthinking it. A third is to pick something I said, interpreted it in a weird way, and go to town on that.

But what you won't see (unless I've actually goaded them into it) is actually spelling out what facts are missing and how this led the poster to make an utterly wrong conclusion.

It's frustrating, but I refuse to give up. And this was just the easier one to unpack.
  #15  
Old 02-21-2019, 04:06 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 35,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by Covfefe View Post
Until they take the partisan blinders off it will never occur to them that the WaPo did anything wrong.

The worst part is there was no great mystery. They they had access to video footage of everything that happened from day one. They had it and Nathan Phillips swept at least a few of them up off their feet.
Funny, then, that you don't provide this supposed non-partisan argument about what Washington Post did wrong.

-----

Rather than going with being short, this one uses projection. Accuse the other side of what you yourself are doing.

A non-partisan look at this is that WaPo did what all news articles do: they posted about the story, and reported what the alleged victim said. They made no claims of their own about the incident.

octopus, on the other hand, takes a partisan look. He pretends that WaPo is responsible for what other people do. WaPo not having done anything wrong is inconvenient to his argument, so he pulls in the death threats and harassment, which are obviously wrong.

There's also the continued assertion that the MAGA hat was the only reason anyone was upset, despite repeatedly being told by the people who were upset what the problems actually were. This is, of course, the classic strawman. No, he's not bad simply because he wore the hat. But that was never the claim.

What Covfefe is doing is simply coming in for the assist of someone who is using more blatant dishonest tactics. He make a completely partisan attack on the left, even using snarl words. So Covfefe comes in and pretends his opponents are the actual partisans.

And, again, no actual evidence is proposed.

-----

And, yes, I'm sure some of you can see everything I'm saying. But I'm trying to point it out so that maybe we can stop doing this over and over with these people, and hoping that pointing out how their tactics are not actually arguments will somehow get through to them. They'll realize they have nothing to support their own opinions.

Oh, and watch out for this being used to deflect from the fact that nothing substantially changed with the additional video information. A more advanced tactic is to move on to the next argument while assuming something not proven.

The stuff about the tactics that may be used to argue against me still applies. If they can make an honest argument, it would involve making a claim and then providing evidence to support that claim.

(Another tactic may be to claim I'm "lecturing" or being condescending. It's a great way to deflect from the claim.)
  #16  
Old 02-21-2019, 05:21 AM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,395
For starters, the kids weren't the ones targetting Phillips, or the group of Native Americans -- it was the Black Hebrew Israelites:

Quote:
It seems that the Black Hebrew Israelites had come to the Lincoln Memorial with the express intention of verbally confronting the Native Americans, some of whom had already begun to gather as the video begins, many of them in Native dress. The Black Hebrew Israelites’ leader begins shouting at them: “Before you started worshipping totem poles, you was worshipping the true and living God. Before you became an idol worshipper, you was worshipping the true and living God. This is the reason why this land was taken away from you! Because you worship everything except the most high. You worship every creation except the Creator—and that’s what we are here to tell you to do.”
Quote:
Black Hebrew Israelites believe, among other things, that they are indigenous people. The preacher tells a woman that “you’re not an Indian. Indian means ‘savage.’ ”
Quote:
By now the gathering of Covington Catholic boys watching the scene has grown to 10 or 12, some of them in MAGA hats. They are about 15 feet away, and while the conflict is surely beyond their range of experience, it also includes biblical explication, something with which they are familiar.

“Don’t stand to the side and mock,” the speaker orders the boys, who do not appear to be mocking him. “Bring y’all cracker ass up here and make a statement.” The boys turn away and begin walking back to the larger group.

“You little dirty-ass crackers. Your day coming. Your day coming … ’cause your little dusty asses wouldn’t walk down a street in a black neighborhood, and go walk up on nobody playing no games like that,” he calls after them, but they take no notice. “Yeah, ’cause I will stick my foot in your little ass.”

By now the Native American ceremony has begun, and the attendees have linked arms and begun dancing. “They just don’t know who they are,” one of the Black Hebrew Israelites says remorsefully to another. Earlier he had called them “Uncle Tomahawks.”
Right. It's all the fault of the kids.

Last edited by Guinastasia; 02-21-2019 at 05:21 AM.
  #17  
Old 02-21-2019, 06:35 AM
Covfefe's Avatar
Covfefe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 815
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Funny, then, that you don't provide this supposed non-partisan argument about what Washington Post did wrong.
It was out of laziness, fear, and frustration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Rather than going with being short, this one uses projection. Accuse the other side of what you yourself are doing.
I'm not on either side. I think CovCath students should be treated with a certain baseline dignity and certain ugly assumptions withheld before there is better information. That often isn't happening in the couple of threads there have been because they fit a profile of being privileged and seemingly entitled.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
A non-partisan look at this is that WaPo did what all news articles do: they posted about the story, and reported what the alleged victim said. They made no claims of their own about the incident.
When someone is in a rally or protest and alleges victimhood via intimidation, the right thing to do is interview those who were there, get as many relevant perspectives as possible. Better yet if there is video.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
octopus, on the other hand, takes a partisan look. He pretends that WaPo is responsible for what other people do. WaPo not having done anything wrong is inconvenient to his argument, so he pulls in the death threats and harassment, which are obviously wrong.
I don't agree with octopus here. And I don't think the threats and harassment are directly connected enough that this kid will get much of a legal windfall. I hope there can be a quick settlement out of court for a fraction of what they're asking - seems like that would be a reasonable outcome without knowing the intricacies and being under the impression he would not have been considered a public figure where he was. It's very unfortunate this became a national story. I can think of few clashes less worthy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
There's also the continued assertion that the MAGA hat was the only reason anyone was upset, despite repeatedly being told by the people who were upset what the problems actually were. This is, of course, the classic strawman. No, he's not bad simply because he wore the hat. But that was never the claim.
https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...8&postcount=59
Okay, you came into the thread about this in GD with patently incorrect information. You thought they were chanting racist slurs that video proved they weren't. You thought they were telling people to go back to their country. You thought they were college students. I haven't found where you've amended or acknowledged you have accurate information now. I don't know if you have ever read anything about what happened. I would have loved to back up what I'm saying and doing that is scary because I already knew this about you, and it feels like I could be talking with someone who doesn't think the earth is round.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
What Covfefe is doing is simply coming in for the assist of someone who is using more blatant dishonest tactics. He make a completely partisan attack on the left, even using snarl words. So Covfefe comes in and pretends his opponents are the actual partisans.
I'll grant that it was a dishonest tactic on my part. The reason for it is that octopus was less wrong, terrifying, and dangerous than the other contributions to that point (mhendo's post came after I started responding) and to some extent I agree with his perspective on this topic from seeing his posts in another thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
And, again, no actual evidence is proposed.
I'm having trouble finding an upload of the entire footage from a source I know to be neutral enough. If such a thing exists, that plus the platform they gave Nathan Phillips is my lazily submitted evidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
And, yes, I'm sure some of you can see everything I'm saying. But I'm trying to point it out so that maybe we can stop doing this over and over with these people, and hoping that pointing out how their tactics are not actually arguments will somehow get through to them. They'll realize they have nothing to support their own opinions.
Who's the we? I agree with you on a lot of political related things. I am terrified of what a world would be if we normalized doxing others based on a few characteristics we know of them and not their actions - which is usually misguided as well. Do you understand? This makes some of the most vulnerable people in society afraid to leave their homes. Do you not respect some mentally ill people are afraid to venture away from home and in a world of many cell phones don't want people out there to instigate unforced conflicts by taking things out of context? I do not consider those who don't care or use tu quoque arguments when confronted with the bare truth of this harassment to be on the side of minorities. Yes, both sides do it. The point is you (certain someones, not necessarily you BigT) should be capable of saying one thing is bad without always following it up with saying, 'what about the other side'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Oh, and watch out for this being used to deflect from the fact that nothing substantially changed with the additional video information. A more advanced tactic is to move on to the next argument while assuming something not proven.
I think I can unequivocably say Nathan Phillips smeared these students. Watch the footage and put yourself in their shoes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
The stuff about the tactics that may be used to argue against me still applies. If they can make an honest argument, it would involve making a claim and then providing evidence to support that claim.

(Another tactic may be to claim I'm "lecturing" or being condescending. It's a great way to deflect from the claim.)
I would never claim you are lecturing or being condescending. My tactics are more redeemable.

Last edited by Covfefe; 02-21-2019 at 06:35 AM.
  #18  
Old 02-21-2019, 06:59 AM
Covfefe's Avatar
Covfefe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 815
By saying I reject the position that the WaPo did nothing wrong, that is hardly taking a side fitting in with the way that two sides are being discussed.
  #19  
Old 02-21-2019, 07:00 AM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Well I hope the WaPo doesn't settle and uses this to teach the right a lesson.
I'll eat my hat. Trump has already urged the brat on, battle lines have thusly been drawn.
  #20  
Old 02-21-2019, 07:59 AM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 34,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Well I hope the WaPo doesn't settle and uses this to teach the right a lesson.
Serious newspapers don’t settle over straight news reporting.
  #21  
Old 02-21-2019, 08:50 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinastasia View Post
For starters, the kids weren't the ones targetting Phillips, or the group of Native Americans -- it was the Black Hebrew Israelites:
IMHO there is a reason why the Black Hebrew Israelites are not one of the main targets with the right wing media, the BHI is a very reactionary group and one of the few minority groups that support very conservative views regarding abortion. What I do think took place is something that the right wing is loath to pay attention to: how divisions among people of the right can come furiously when instead of concentrating on the march for life it gets shifted to the trolling what MAGA paraphernalia can get or give among people that were supposed to come together for the anti-abortion issue.

Of course, taking them to task would not do when the conservative narrative here is that this incident was all the fault of the liberal press.
  #22  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:17 AM
Lightnin' is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Apple Core
Posts: 7,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
What would that lesson be? That wearing a hat is sufficient to be threatened with death by loony celebrities and loony nobodies in part due to libelous representation? I think the so-called right is already sufficiently aware of the deranged nature of the easily triggered rabid left.
Christine Ford would like a word.
__________________
What's the good of Science if nobody gets hurt?
  #23  
Old 02-21-2019, 09:57 AM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,204
Why is that Covington student able to sue for $250 million when the right lies endlessly?


IOKIARDI

This is the rule that helps explain a lot these days.
  #24  
Old 02-21-2019, 10:14 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 38,568
Actually the rule seems to be "they were wearing MAGA hats so any accusation against them is true".

Regard,
Shodan
  #25  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:03 AM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Actually the rule seems to be "they were wearing MAGA hats so any accusation against them is true".
I can see how you would be stupid enough to think that, yeah. Please note that your stuff in quotes is a paraphrase that you made up in your own dysfunctional mind, not a quote of anything that anyone actually said.

I mean, given what is known of the incident, the article, and the conversations that we have had on this board, that I know you were aware of and participated in, you'd have to be an utter fucking moron to think that your assertion has any bearing to reality.

Which is why I think that you are sincere, and that you do think that your unsupported and unjustifiable assertion has some sort of bearing on reality. You really are just that fucking dumb.
  #26  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:11 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 32,568
IANAL, but if the defamation claim is saying that accurately reporting the words of a participant in the incident (i.e. Phillips) is defamation or libel, then that doesn't seem like a legal claim that has any chance of succeeding. How could it be libel or defamation to accurately report an involved party's statements?
  #27  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:13 AM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,382
These kids were sent to Washington by their parents and their school to protest abortion. They are tools. Now Trump is using them as well to do battle against his arch enemy "the media". Tools, all.
  #28  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:27 AM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,204
Apparently some believe that reporting on the actions and words of people is wrong and worthy of punishment.

But only if they are the spawn of Republicans, sent with the specific purpose to protest and agitate.

Then a newspaper should not report on any negative consequences that come from their actions. For Republicans, freedom of speech means "freedom to say whatever I want, and be free from any consequences"
  #29  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:28 AM
mhendo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
Why is that Covington student able to sue for $250 million when the right lies endlessly?
What do you mean "able to sue"?

Just about anyone can file a lawsuit for just about anything, and that's all that has happened so far. A law firm has, in consultation with the kid and his parents, drawn up a suit and paid to file it with the court. That's it.

No-one with the power to decide anything has weighed in on the actual legal merits of the claims. No-one has won or lost anything. The filing of the suit said exactly zero about the relative merits of the Covington student's actions or the lies of the right wing.
  #30  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:31 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 13,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
IANAL, but if the defamation claim is saying that accurately reporting the words of a participant in the incident (i.e. Phillips) is defamation or libel, then that doesn't seem like a legal claim that has any chance of succeeding. How could it be libel or defamation to accurately report an involved party's statements?
AIUI, the entire point of the defamation claim is that Sandmann was inaccurately portrayed in WashPost. That the media outlet claimed that he was harassing Phillips when video evidence shows that he didn't and that it was Philliips approaching him, not the other way around.
  #31  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:34 AM
mhendo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
IANAL, but if the defamation claim is saying that accurately reporting the words of a participant in the incident (i.e. Phillips) is defamation or libel, then that doesn't seem like a legal claim that has any chance of succeeding. How could it be libel or defamation to accurately report an involved party's statements?
That was my initial amateur reading of the case too.

Here's a slightly different take from a lawyer on the Volokh Conspiracy blog:
Quote:
What happened during the encounter is a story that developed over several days, with more video footage and testimony surfacing along the way, and I would be surprised if the court held the Washington Post to the standard of knowledge and investigation that Sandmann's lawyers seem to expect. It is also not too clear who the "unbiased" witnesses (is there such a thing?) are that the Post should have interrogated before printing any story. To this day, the Internet debates what exactly happened on that day. It is doubtful that a newspaper will be held liable for essentially failing to take the plaintiff's side in the controversy.
  #32  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:46 AM
Really Not All That Bright is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 68,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
Complaint can be read here for great amusement.
Ah. 99% of the complaint is for public consumption. The internal inconsistencies are pretty amusing, though.
Quote:
The Post wrongfully targeted and bullied Nicholas because he was the white, Catholic student wearing a red “Make America Great Again” souvenir cap on a school field trip to the January 18 March for Life in Washington, D.C.
Quote:
Nicholas has zero history of political activism
He was at a fucking political rally!
Quote:
Unlike the Post’s abuse of the profession of journalism, Plaintiffs do not bring this lawsuit to use the judicial system to further a political agenda.
Quote:
The Post ignored basic journalist standards because it wanted to advance its well-known and easily documented, biased agenda against President Donald J. Trump (“the President”) by impugning individuals perceived to be supporters of the President.
Quote:
The Post negligently and recklessly published its False and Defamatory Accusations in derogation of accepted principles of journalistic ethics, including by wrongfully placing the anti-Trump, anti-Catholic, and pro-life agenda over the harm its False and Defamatory Accusations caused to Nicholas.
Not political. Riiiight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
AIUI, the entire point of the defamation claim is that Sandmann was inaccurately portrayed in WashPost. That the media outlet claimed that he was harassing Phillips when video evidence shows that he didn't and that it was Philliips approaching him, not the other way around.
And yet the complaint only cites quotations from witnesses which the Post republished.

Last edited by Really Not All That Bright; 02-21-2019 at 11:48 AM.
  #33  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:48 AM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 8,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
Apparently some believe that reporting on the actions and words of people is wrong and worthy of punishment.

But only if they are the spawn of Republicans, sent with the specific purpose to protest and agitate.

Then a newspaper should not report on any negative consequences that come from their actions. For Republicans, freedom of speech means "freedom to say whatever I want, and be free from any consequences"
Freedom of the press doesn’t mean freedom from consequences. Speech is consequenced with assault and bike locks? Dangerous press can be consequenced with bankruptcy.
  #34  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:56 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 32,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
AIUI, the entire point of the defamation claim is that Sandmann was inaccurately portrayed in WashPost. That the media outlet claimed that he was harassing Phillips when video evidence shows that he didn't and that it was Philliips approaching him, not the other way around.
Do you have a cite for a WP article that makes assertions (not quotes from participants, but actual unquoted assertions) about who was harassing who, or who instigated the confrontation, that the filers claim was defamatory/libelous?
  #35  
Old 02-21-2019, 11:57 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 32,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
Freedom of the press doesn’t mean freedom from consequences. Speech is consequenced with assault and bike locks? Dangerous press can be consequenced with bankruptcy.
Without some sort of cite or similar, how is this relevant to this thread? What did the WaPo do that violated the law or Sandmann's rights?
  #36  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:10 PM
mhendo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright View Post
He was at a fucking political rally!
It's hilarious, right?

Not only was he at a political rally, but he and his schoolmates had traveled about 500 miles to be there. I consider myself a pretty politically active person, and I've been to a bunch of political activities during my life, but I've never, as a private citizen, traveled 500 miles specifically to attend one.

The whole complaint is less a lawsuit that it is an intervention in cultural politics.
  #37  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:24 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 8,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Without some sort of cite or similar, how is this relevant to this thread? What did the WaPo do that violated the law or Sandmann's rights?
What did an adolescent wearing a hat do that justified death threats? You want consequences? Maybe a sympathetic court will deliver. We live in an age of social media fueled mob rule. Best learn how to exploit it.

Last edited by octopus; 02-21-2019 at 12:25 PM.
  #38  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:26 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 32,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
What did an adolescent wearing a hat do that justified death threats?
???

This thread is about a lawsuit against the WaPo. Not sure what you're talking about. I'm unaware of anyone in this thread (or the WaPo, for that matter) making any attempt to justify death threats. Are you asserting that WaPo violated Sandmann's rights? If so, what is your justification for this assertion?

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 02-21-2019 at 12:27 PM.
  #39  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:27 PM
Folacin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: North of the River
Posts: 3,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Do you have a cite for a WP article that makes assertions (not quotes from participants, but actual unquoted assertions) about who was harassing who, or who instigated the confrontation, that the filers claim was defamatory/libelous?
I'm hopeful that the lawsuit goes nowhere, but one can certainly defame someone by only publishing quotes that make him look bad, and not any that show another side to an issue. Hell, Fox makes its money doing that on a regular basis.
  #40  
Old 02-21-2019, 12:43 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,382
I didn't realize that the Washington Post issued death threats. No wonder they're being sued.
  #41  
Old 02-21-2019, 01:20 PM
Mr. Miskatonic's Avatar
Mr. Miskatonic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Under a pile of books
Posts: 6,658
This lawsuit is purely for rightwing consumption and anyone giving it a lick of seriousness is being used like a tool. The whole complaint reads like it was written by a PR firm, not a lawyer.

I imagine a tiny minority of the faithful imagine that during discovery (if it gets that far) they well get to see some of WaPos emails and dream there will be ones say 'Get the hats!!!!'

But that is not how the WaPo, or any respectable media (liberal or conservative) works. That is only how the rightwing imagines it works because that is how they work. Much like how the righties are constantly accusing the liberals of voter fraud when the tiny number of cases are actually Republicans (c.f. North Carolina). They make the accusation because its what how they would operate.

In reality, this case is just for drumming up some funds for a GoFundMe page and it will quietly fade out.
__________________
"When you kill the Morlocks, the Eloi tend to die too"
  #42  
Old 02-21-2019, 02:17 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright View Post
He was at a fucking political rally!
Note it says "history of". Was this the first time Sanderson participated at a rally, or has he been to others?

As for Phillips's claims being dishonest, once again, it's been proven many times that they were.


(And if you want to sue for millions when the right lies, hey, no one's stopping you dude.)
  #43  
Old 02-21-2019, 02:56 PM
SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Van Nuys CA
Posts: 14,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Nylock View Post
Your amusing conclusions are drawn from an incomplete knowledge of the facts.
So, post the facts then.
  #44  
Old 02-21-2019, 03:26 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 13,486
So, help me understand something:

From the video evidence, it appears that all Sandmann did was wear a red MAGA hat and smirk. But there seem to be 2 liberal camps on the issue:

The 1st liberal camp believes that Sandmann did something other than just wear a MAGA hat and smirk - that maybe there was taunting or other stuff going on by Sandmann that wasn't shown on camera;

But the 2nd liberal camp believes that the mere act of wearing a red MAGA hat and smirking is worthy of punishment - that even if Phillips approached Sandmann and Sandmann did nothing but smirk in silence while wearing his hat, that that is bad enough - that that is a sin in and of itself.

Am I understanding this correctly?
  #45  
Old 02-21-2019, 03:49 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 32,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
So, help me understand something:

From the video evidence, it appears that all Sandmann did was wear a red MAGA hat and smirk. But there seem to be 2 liberal camps on the issue:

The 1st liberal camp believes that Sandmann did something other than just wear a MAGA hat and smirk - that maybe there was taunting or other stuff going on by Sandmann that wasn't shown on camera;

But the 2nd liberal camp believes that the mere act of wearing a red MAGA hat and smirking is worthy of punishment - that even if Phillips approached Sandmann and Sandmann did nothing but smirk in silence while wearing his hat, that that is bad enough - that that is a sin in and of itself.

Am I understanding this correctly?
What the hell is a "liberal camp"? There are probably liberals that believe a whole variety of things about this incident, but the vast majority of us aren't thinking about it much at all, much less staking out a firm position on who is at fault.
  #46  
Old 02-21-2019, 04:23 PM
Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 31,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobot View Post
These kids were sent to Washington by their parents and their school to protest abortion. They are tools.
Would you also say that high school students protesting at a state capitol in favor of gun control legislation are "tools" sent by their parents and school?

Not sure why the OP thinks it's unconscionable to have this lawsuit permitted because They Do It Too.

The Post may have done less than due diligence in initially reporting this story (I accepted it at pretty much face value at first, especially after seeing a photo of a Covington h.s. student in blackface taunting a black player at a basketball game), but it's hard to see how this kid deserves a whopping $$ award for defamation.

Last edited by Jackmannii; 02-21-2019 at 04:24 PM.
  #47  
Old 02-21-2019, 04:28 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,382
If it wasn't their idea, and they wouldn't have done it on their own, shit yeah.
  #48  
Old 02-21-2019, 05:45 PM
mhendo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Am I understanding this correctly?
Based on prior experience with your posts, my initial suspicion was that the answer to this question is most likely "no." Reading your "analysis," I see I was correct.
  #49  
Old 02-21-2019, 05:58 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
IMHO there is a reason why the Black Hebrew Israelites are not one of the main targets with the right wing media, the BHI is a very reactionary group and one of the few minority groups that support very conservative views regarding abortion. What I do think took place is something that the right wing is loath to pay attention to: how divisions among people of the right can come furiously when instead of concentrating on the march for life it gets shifted to the trolling what MAGA paraphernalia can get or give among people that were supposed to come together for the anti-abortion issue.

Of course, taking them to task would not do when the conservative narrative here is that this incident was all the fault of the liberal press.
Good point -- however, I do wish more people would admit that hey, we (general we, not we here) fucked up and got it wrong.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bobot View Post
If it wasn't their idea, and they wouldn't have done it on their own, shit yeah.
Most likely they did it to get out of class. (Most of my classmates did so) So perhaps you have a point.

That being said, did they deserve all the shit they got, when the accusations turned out to be false?
  #50  
Old 02-21-2019, 06:21 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,382
Oh, I'm not interested in who deserved what. No one got hurt, it's over, everyone involved can feel free to go about their lives with the lessons they learned that day. Or try to sue the Washington Post for a quarter billion, you know, before the glow wears off.

Last edited by bobot; 02-21-2019 at 06:22 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017