- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Rittenhouse lawsuits questions
Posted on 11/30/21 at 12:16 pm
Posted on 11/30/21 at 12:16 pm
Has anyone seen the filed complaints? If so, what is he specifically claiming that the networks, individuals, or shows did? Is he going after the companies, the hosts/anchors, or the producers?
Thank you sorry if stupid questions or been posted.
Thank you sorry if stupid questions or been posted.
9
Posted on 11/30/21 at 12:17 pm to sms151t
quote:
Is he going after the companies, the hosts/anchors, or the producers?
Everybody
Posted on 11/30/21 at 12:31 pm to Wtodd
Posted on 11/30/21 at 12:58 pm to sms151t
Bongino had Jenna Ellis on his show last week talking about Rittenhouse holding the media accountable through lawsuits. Based on their discussion, the lawsuits would focus on both the media personalities and the networks.
According to their comments, the defamation standards for public figures are different. Public figures (like Bongino, Ellis or Pres. Trump) have to prove in court that the media intended to lie with malice towards the public figure.
However, a private citizen (like Rittenhouse) just has to prove that the defamatory statement provided by the media or elected office wasn't true.
White supremist = not true
Illegally owned rifle = not true
Transported illegal weapon across state lines = not true
Went to Kenosha to chase down and kill/shoot people = not true
I've not seen any complaints filed yet and I'm not a lawyer, but I thought this podcast discussion was interesting.
According to their comments, the defamation standards for public figures are different. Public figures (like Bongino, Ellis or Pres. Trump) have to prove in court that the media intended to lie with malice towards the public figure.
However, a private citizen (like Rittenhouse) just has to prove that the defamatory statement provided by the media or elected office wasn't true.
White supremist = not true
Illegally owned rifle = not true
Transported illegal weapon across state lines = not true
Went to Kenosha to chase down and kill/shoot people = not true
I've not seen any complaints filed yet and I'm not a lawyer, but I thought this podcast discussion was interesting.
This post was edited on 11/30/21 at 1:02 pm
Posted on 11/30/21 at 1:12 pm to sms151t
The View hosts (Whoopi and the ugly chick) were chosen for Round 1 as of yesterday. That's all I'm aware of so far
Posted on 11/30/21 at 1:13 pm to Stuttgart Tiger
you left off waycist= not true.
Similar concept to white supremacist, but I would chalk it up as a different offense to pad the stats.
Similar concept to white supremacist, but I would chalk it up as a different offense to pad the stats.
This post was edited on 11/30/21 at 1:15 pm
Posted on 11/30/21 at 1:16 pm to Stuttgart Tiger
Saw a lawyer mention that calling someone a racist (or white supremacist in this case) cannot and will not ever win in court because it's an opinion and has precedence in many former lawsuits.
The other lies the Commie News Networks made can and will be monetized no doubt.
The other lies the Commie News Networks made can and will be monetized no doubt.
Posted on 11/30/21 at 1:17 pm to Stuttgart Tiger
quote:
White supremist = not true
Illegally owned rifle = not true
Transported illegal weapon across state lines = not true
Went to Kenosha to chase down and kill/shoot people = not true
I've not seen any complaints filed yet and I'm not a lawyer, but I thought this podcast discussion was interesting.
And don't forget Morning Joe's "Rittenhouse fired at least 60 rounds that night."
Posted on 11/30/21 at 1:30 pm to Bearcat90
quote:
Saw a lawyer mention that calling someone a racist (or white supremacist in this case) cannot and will not ever win in court because it's an opinion and has precedence in many former lawsuits.
Under the law saying that somebody has a venereal disease is actionable per se
I would argue in today’s environment that white supremacist allegation is worse by far and would be actionable per se
Also note that nobody preface what they said with saying my opinion
Posted on 11/30/21 at 1:32 pm to sms151t
quote:
Has anyone seen the filed complaints?
Considering that lawsuits are public record, the fact that no one has "seen" them is proof that they don't exist.
Posted on 11/30/21 at 2:00 pm to dafif
quote:
I would argue in today’s environment that white supremacist allegation is worse by far and would be actionable per se
You'd be incorrect. Just scratching the surface, but if you want to look at precedents here are a few:
Forte v. Jones, 2013 WL 1164929
Edelman v. Croonquist, 2010 WL 1816180
Stevens v. Tillman, 855 F.2d 394, 402 (7th Cir. 1988) Squitieri v. Piedmont Airlines, Inc., 2018 WL 934829
Posted on 11/30/21 at 4:01 pm to sms151t
quote:
Ayanna Pressley
@AyannaPressley
A 17 year old white supremacist domestic terrorist drove across state lines, armed with an AR 15.
He shot and killed 2 people who had assembled to affirm the value, dignity, and worth of Black lives.
Fix your damn headlines.
Based on her tweet from 8/26/20, do you think Rep. Ayanna Pressley is in danger of being sued and losing her case?
This post was edited on 11/30/21 at 4:03 pm
Posted on 11/30/21 at 4:08 pm to Stuttgart Tiger
Didn't some hammer his mom about being a bad mother for dropping him off there, etc etc?? She didn't even see him off cause she was working I think. I wonder if she can get a little sumtin sumtin for her troubles.
I'm guessing a lot of it can be based on if the info was available and/or if they tried to confirm, like real journalists/reporters should, or just spouting out subjective opinions with intent. Obviously proof is less needed for that but yeah we'll see. Will be interesting, and I hope they all learn a lesson.
I'm guessing a lot of it can be based on if the info was available and/or if they tried to confirm, like real journalists/reporters should, or just spouting out subjective opinions with intent. Obviously proof is less needed for that but yeah we'll see. Will be interesting, and I hope they all learn a lesson.
Posted on 11/30/21 at 4:14 pm to TOSOV
Yes, early on media reported that Rittenhouse's mom drove him all the way across state lines and dropped him off with his loaded AR-15 so that he could hunt down BLM activists.
All false information, presented as fact.
All false information, presented as fact.
This post was edited on 11/30/21 at 4:16 pm
Posted on 11/30/21 at 4:21 pm to TOSOV
quote:
Didn't some hammer his mom about being a bad mother for dropping him off there, etc etc?? She didn't even see him off cause she was working I think. I wonder if she can get a little sumtin sumtin for her troubles.
She probably has an easier case to win.
They can try to argue Rittenhouse is a public figure. They can try to argue that "murderer" and "racist" are opinions (for the former, Hugh O'Connor's drug dealer lost a defamation case against Carroll for referring to the dealer as a murderer). They'll likely argue no harm no foul for the blatantly incorrect factual statements like crossing state lines and shooting 60 rounds. It's bogus but the defendants will try to wiggle out by saying the not guilty verdict erases any damage to his reputation.
It's BS, but that kind of thing makes it hard to win a defamation suit.
For the mom, there was no court case involving her so she could obtain an acquittal, no remotely possible argument that she's a public figure, and no way to spin "she bought him the rifle and drove him to Kenosha" as opinion. They'll try to say no harm in order to minimize the damages, so I hope the punitive damages are a lottery verdict.
Posted on 11/30/21 at 4:59 pm to idlewatcher
quote:
The View hosts (Whoopi and the ugly chick)
They're both fugly by any standard if you ask me.
This post was edited on 11/30/21 at 5:56 pm
Posted on 11/30/21 at 5:04 pm to TBoy
quote:What morons are downvoting this? If actually made we’d have the fillings to pore over by now. This is an objective fact and not open to interpretation. And they’d be making the rounds in conservative circles expeditiously.
Considering that lawsuits are public record, the fact that no one has "seen" them is proof that they don't exist.
The View “lawsuits” were broken on a random Twitter account with no sauces. Knowing people are this gullible is depressing as shite.
This post was edited on 11/30/21 at 5:14 pm
Posted on 11/30/21 at 6:53 pm to Bearcat90
quote:
Edelman v. Croonquist, 2010 WL 1816180
Stevens v. Tillman, 855 F.2d 394, 402 (7th Cir. 1988) Squitieri v. Piedmont Airlines, Inc., 2018 WL 934829
In Edelman defendant is a comedian, nice try not even close.
In Steven’s the case it went to the jury and they found false statements
In Squitieri the court said
quote:
Under North Carolina law, "expressions of opinion not asserting provable facts are protected speech." Daniels v. Metro Magazine Holding Co., L.L.C., 634 S.E.2d 586, 590 (N.C. Ct. App. 2006). "[I]f a defendant's words cannot be described as either true or false, they are not actionable." Biospherics, Inc. v. Forbes, Inc., 151 F.3d 180, 183 (4th Cir. 1998). At a minimum, statements that cannot be proven as verifiably true or false are non- actionable opinion, and cannot support defamation liability.
Further, there is a discussion of calling a person a racist and it being opinion, that does not come close to the demonstrably false statement of calling him a white supremicist as that entails another complete set of circumstances
None of the actions will be dismissed on 12b6 motions and, personally, I would file in the local state court and make them remove them. Either way, I think Kyle gets it to a jury if large amounts are not paid.
Posted on 11/30/21 at 7:00 pm to RemouladeSawce
quote:
What morons are downvoting this?
Morons aren't.
People who know TBoy is a POS are. It's the messenger...not the message.
Posted on 11/30/21 at 7:06 pm to sms151t
I have no real dog in this hunt, but I’ve been saying for a long time that libel is an old-school solution to our modern problems. I supported the defamation suits by Dominion just like I’d support these by Rittenhouse. I’m honestly politically agnostic these days, and I support the contention that false statements of fact should be punished with monetary damages. You can’t just make shite up. It’s an old idea that needs modern application.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News