Edaw
Parody
- 12,305
- 77,913
Get a free Kyle Rittenhouse at Culver's
- Thread starter Nirgon
- Start date
- Status
Byr
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 3,663
- 4,943
So you can't actually argue why its wrong. Got ya.
- 1
- 1
Ambiturner
Ssraeszha Raider
- 16,040
- 19,500
McQueen
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 3,127
- 5,493
Byr
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 3,663
- 4,943
I also provided a link to why opinion would be a defense, examples of it being used and an expert who I assume we all respected given his stance on Kyle's case until now. Your turn. I'm very curious in your thinking. Why would a celebrity posting on twitter be considered a statement of fact rather than an opinion?
Break
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 4,263
- 11,787
Their food is so hit and miss with me. I swear sometimes you get old food that's been laying in there for half an hour, other times it's amazing and rivals Whataburger.
- 1
Kiroy
Marine Biologist
- 34,642
- 99,968
JUST IN: Tucker Carlson to Interview Kyle Rittenhouse on Monday
Fox News' Tucker Carlson will interview Kyle Rittenhouse on Monday for his first TV interview after being found not guilty.www.mediaite.com
first pay day, nice!
bet he got a cool million for this interview
- 9
- 3
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 42,377
- 50,434
AladainAF
Best Rabbit
- 12,864
- 30,813
If you're pulling your kids out of school over the rittenhouse trial you're a fucking idiot.
Have them watch 12 angry men on a saturday to teach them everything they need to know how this shit should work.
- 10
Arbitrary
Tranny Chaser
- 27,134
- 71,936
Been a while since I've seen it but those dudes totally go off and do their own independent research during deliberations
- 1
elcaro1101
Vyemm Raider
- 1,972
- 4,375
Kyle just invented the redux.
Pretty sure they considered the groups membership closed, but I would hope they would open the books for Kyle.
- 2
- 1
Edaw
Parody
- 12,305
- 77,913
Elements
To prove prima facie defamation, a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence; and 4) damages, or some harm caused to the person or entity who is the subject of the statement.
.
.
.
You are a pedophile. False statement purporting to be fact. (I'm assuming you aren't really a pedophile)
If my statements caused harm, then I have defamed you. Doesn't matter who I am, who I work for, or really even how I phrase it. Intent, negligence, scope matter, nothing else.
- 2
- 6,302
- 16,947
Byr
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 3,663
- 4,943
You calling me a pedophile isn't a statement of fact. You haven't even tried to show its true in any fashion. You haven't even presented it as fact, why would random joe juror consider it one?
Byr
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 3,663
- 4,943
Would it even matter? Its still a statement of opinion. If I were on trial, news agencies would have to call me an alleged pedophile but that standard wouldn't carry over to random celeb A on twitter who reasonable people don't view as a news source.
Kiroy
Marine Biologist
- 34,642
- 99,968
damages is easy considering he'll need a security detail for the rest of his life because of media megaphoning lies and propaganda about the situation
- 4
Ambiturner
Ssraeszha Raider
- 16,040
- 19,500
It would obviously be based on how it's phrased and who the person is. If it's a ditzy reality show "star" or some other celebrity not known for being bright then it would be hard to show damages. Someone known to be knowledgeable and well versed saying the exact same thing could make showing damages much easier.
I think he'd be much better off by going the Sandmann route and going after actual news sources since they're "supposed to be" taken seriously and damage to reputation is almost automatic.
- 2
- Status