Started By
Message
locked post

Legal Ramifications of Slandering Ryan Mallett

Posted on 2/26/11 at 3:25 pm
Posted by The_Pistol
Member since Dec 2003
2519 posts
Posted on 2/26/11 at 3:25 pm
This site is full of posts linking Ryan Mallett to meth use and/or manufacture.

I've tried to find a reputable source that can substantiate the claim, but it appears to be total slander. This is the kind of thing that can cost this guy a lot of money if NFL GM's get the slightest inkling that there's any truth to it.

I'm not an attorney, but does allowing this kind of slander (if there is no truth to it) to be posted leave Tigerdroppings.com exposed to legal liability?
Posted by Pedro
Geaux Hawks
Member since Jul 2008
34457 posts
Posted on 2/26/11 at 3:29 pm to
yes because all NFL GMs search tigerdroppings.com for dirt on their players.
Posted by yellowfin
Coastal Bar
Member since May 2006
98086 posts
Posted on 2/26/11 at 3:44 pm to
No
Posted by beaver
The 755 Club
Member since Sep 2009
46861 posts
Posted on 2/26/11 at 4:36 pm to
Is this thread for seriousness?
Posted by HeadChange
Abort gay babies
Member since May 2009
43858 posts
Posted on 2/26/11 at 5:09 pm to
Tigerdroppings sealed Cam Newtons fate.


Mallet is fricked.
Posted by jcole4lsu
The Kwisatz Haderach
Member since Nov 2007
30950 posts
Posted on 2/26/11 at 5:55 pm to
quote:

I'm not an attorney

say it aint so

"slander" is a joke. every pissed off jackass claims they are going to sue someone for it, never happens.

furthermore you should do a bit of research on what "slander" really is.

quote:

There are several ways a person must go about proving that libel has taken place. For example, in the United States, the person first must prove that the statement was false. Second, that person must prove that the statement caused harm. And, third, they must prove that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement. These steps are for an ordinary citizen. In the case of a celebrity or public official trying to prove libel, they must prove the first three steps, and must (in the United States) prove the statement was made with the intent to do harm, or with reckless disregard for the truth


i think its safe to say that ryan mallet would qualify as a "celebrity" and therefore the 4th point would be needed, which is basically impossible.

oh, and its LIBEL since its written on the net.
This post was edited on 2/26/11 at 6:04 pm
Posted by pwejr88
Red Stick
Member since Apr 2007
36427 posts
Posted on 2/26/11 at 7:06 pm to
I would think the fact that this is a privately owned site plays a

H
U
G
E

part.
Posted by ZZTIGERS
Member since Dec 2007
17328 posts
Posted on 2/26/11 at 7:29 pm to
I heard Ryan Mallett sold and used Meth with Chicken.
Posted by LfcSU3520
Arizona
Member since Dec 2003
24466 posts
Posted on 3/1/11 at 12:10 am to
sometimes you have to think of this place as a cafe or sports bar for the socially retarded.

Either way, if we were all sitting around discussing mallett and someone said he was a meth head, we woulndn't be sued. That analogy still applies here.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram