After Suing CNN, Sandmann’s legal team now targeting Bill Maher, Kathy Griffin, HBO, NBC and AP

[Rustic]

Then Trump is in deep shit if butthurt little Nicky wins

Cite examples.

Everybody he’s ever slandered on twitter, in speeaches, etc. For example, slandering Hillary by spending years calling her a criminal and murderer

She's a public figure, dumbass. Sandman is not.

This is a really smart lawyer "sue them all" let the courts sort out the losers. Bill Maher is dumbass, Kathy Griffin a female version I hope they lose their asses, to this Lawyer. Throw enough crap against the wall something is going to stick, They will remember his name!

You bring up a salient point. Bill Maher and Kathy Griffin.

What exactly are they going to "lose their asses" over? Comedy? Really?

"Retribution"?

You have a meth head by the name of Nathan Phillips which is not his real name...
And you have the media taking his side without showing the whole video...
In the name of political correctness...
So basically they supported a fucking fraud, And it kicked them in the ass.... The guy is a professional protester shipped around by a bunch of fucked up politically correct snowflakes.
If you would take your fucking head out of your ass and watch the whole video you would see that that fucked Indian protester started the whole thing… And could not end it.

The kid is a minor, and the media picked Nathan’s Nathan Phillips side which is not his real name... Nathan Phillips(his real name...Nathaniel R. Stanard) is a fucked up Indian activist meth head...
Nathan Phillips (activist) - Wikipedia

 

[Pogo]

oooOOooo, Haiku
From who? For what?

Hey if I go stand nose-to-nose with somebody and smirk, can I get some low millions too? I'm not picky, I'll even take medium millions.

And here I thought you had to actually work for that sort of thing.

Some prominent jounalists and pundits framed the kid to be a bad guy before getting the full story. They got the story wrong...or not entirely correct..which lead to your standard social media pitchfork mob reigning down on the poor kid, his family, and school.

If that's true, if that happend, see if you can answer the question that's been sitting here unanswered for the two months since Smirk Day ---

---- where is it?
Gotta be somewhere. You can't sue for libel without the libel, can you.

Where is this "framing"? How can you get a story 'wrong' when all it is is a video of a kid smirking? The story was "there's this video out". Which....... there was.

Now HOW does that amount to "framing"? Is the kid claiming it wasn't him?

"Pundits" don't count btw. Pundits aren't journalists, are they.

He's a minor. Smirking isnt a crime worthy of what he got in blowback which was generated by the misleading headlines and editorials. The kid got death threats. That isnt acceptable and the disseminators of the incorrect narrative are culpable.

AGAIN --- Show us those incorrect narratives, and we'll (finally) get started.

This is really not a complex question.

I'm not here to formally debate and do the work for you. I'm simply attempting to be fair based on my understanding of the situation. You can choose to ignore me if you dont agree. Or you can go look yourself. I've pretty much laid out what I have.

Hey, if you're going to assert that something happened, then you assume the burden of proof with it that it DID happen.

Without that ---- it didn't happen. And if it didn't happen.......... there is no case.

As I said, this isn't complex. I put this question up two months ago. I have yet to get a single shred of evidence.
Not one.

Now then, if a lawsuit is going to try to make the case that Person X was harmed in the public mind.... and nobody in the public can point to that being done..... it's frivolous litigation. Simple as that. Unless you can explain how a suit can be brought with no evidence at all.

"Evidence" means a real, hard, quantifiable record ---- not the creeping mythology memes of partisan hacks. Something MUST exist. A lot of people use "Beam me up Scotty" as a quote, but in fact it never happened.

That's all only true in a formal debate, which we are not having.

Actually that's true in court, which is what I was referring to and which is not much different. In either case you present a claim and you prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. If you can't you lose the case or the argument.

You asked who and why, and I gave you the cliff notes. Not trying to prove anything and I have no investment in it.

But the premise for said Cliff's Notes has nothing on which to stand. There is no evidence. Without evidence there is no case (in court) and no valid assertion (in debate).

 

[pismoe]

and of course my kids are grown but no way that i'd teach them to kiss azz Grainbely .

Theres a sharp difference between kissing ass and being cognizant and safe in your surroundings. Did you teach your kid to punch anyone that gives them a hard time? A punch can kill, you know. Also, first impressions are critical. Wouldnt want them tanking their first impression to the world.

----------------------------------------- I teach my kid to stand his ground like Nick did Grainbely .

 

[Papageorgio]

The GOP brainwash is very strong I know LOL.....

You don't know Shit you Super Duper Tard......

Any arguments? At all? I know we are not taxing the rich enough and we are falling apart. Opportunity is screwed, people did not just get lazy, super dupers.

I am amazed that a dumb ass tard like yourself can generate enough

brain power to type your bull shit…..

I would bet you couldn’t type and fart at the same time without blowing a fuse………

Do you understand simple math?

If I make a million a year and your dumb ass makes 100,000. a year, you do understand

that if we were both taxed at 10% I would pay 100,000. and your dumb ass would pay 10,000.

Later you Super Duper Shit….

oooOOooo, Haiku

Go get em, Nick! Especially that hooked nose Bill Maher.

After Suing CNN, Sandmann's Legal Team Now Targeting Bill Maher, Kathy Griffin, HBO, NBC and AP

He's just a greedy pos. You'd all hate that if it were reversed. Imo, award him a few mil and send him on his way. No reason for anything more when the average worker doesnt even make that in a lifetime and this kid as a maga doper is definitely falling into that category.

Is that because if it were reversed you'd be ecstatic?

I wouldnt be. The punishment should equal the crime. The only time I support a large settlement is when consequences are severe like certain death or drastic and permanent reduction in quality of life due to negligent or intentional malfeasance. I'm talking people being robbed of their livelihood and excessively traumatized. Or...smaller transgressions carried out en masse with a paper trail of diabolic intention.

In the case of this kid, he will live on just fine and has been mostly exonerated of any wrong doing. At worst, he has suffered some undue trauma and likely had to watch his back for a bit, so he does deserve something maybe in the low millions.

From who? For what?

Hey if I go stand nose-to-nose with somebody and smirk, can I get some low millions too? I'm not picky, I'll even take medium millions.

And here I thought you had to actually work for that sort of thing.

Some prominent jounalists and pundits framed the kid to be a bad guy before getting the full story. They got the story wrong...or not entirely correct..which lead to your standard social media pitchfork mob reigning down on the poor kid, his family, and school.

He's a minor. Smirking isnt a crime worthy of what he got in blowback which was generated by the misleading headlines and editorials. The kid got death threats. That isnt acceptable and the disseminators of the incorrect narrative are culpable.

What would you think would be the proper compensation? I think $250 million is way to high.

 

[grainbely]

Some prominent jounalists and pundits framed the kid to be a bad guy before getting the full story. They got the story wrong...or not entirely correct..which lead to your standard social media pitchfork mob reigning down on the poor kid, his family, and school.

If that's true, if that happend, see if you can answer the question that's been sitting here unanswered for the two months since Smirk Day ---

---- where is it?
Gotta be somewhere. You can't sue for libel without the libel, can you.

Where is this "framing"? How can you get a story 'wrong' when all it is is a video of a kid smirking? The story was "there's this video out". Which....... there was.

Now HOW does that amount to "framing"? Is the kid claiming it wasn't him?

"Pundits" don't count btw. Pundits aren't journalists, are they.

He's a minor. Smirking isnt a crime worthy of what he got in blowback which was generated by the misleading headlines and editorials. The kid got death threats. That isnt acceptable and the disseminators of the incorrect narrative are culpable.

AGAIN --- Show us those incorrect narratives, and we'll (finally) get started.

This is really not a complex question.

I'm not here to formally debate and do the work for you. I'm simply attempting to be fair based on my understanding of the situation. You can choose to ignore me if you dont agree. Or you can go look yourself. I've pretty much laid out what I have.

Hey, if you're going to assert that something happened, then you assume the burden of proof with it that it DID happen.

Without that ---- it didn't happen. And if it didn't happen.......... there is no case.

As I said, this isn't complex. I put this question up two months ago. I have yet to get a single shred of evidence.
Not one.

Now then, if a lawsuit is going to try to make the case that Person X was harmed in the public mind.... and nobody in the public can point to that being done..... it's frivolous litigation. Simple as that. Unless you can explain how a suit can be brought with no evidence at all.

"Evidence" means a real, hard, quantifiable record ---- not the creeping mythology memes of partisan hacks. Something MUST exist. A lot of people use "Beam me up Scotty" as a quote, but in fact it never happened.

That's all only true in a formal debate, which we are not having.

Actually that's true in court, which is what I was referring to and which is not much different. In either case you present a claim and you prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. If you can't you lose the case or the argument.

You asked who and why, and I gave you the cliff notes. Not trying to prove anything and I have no investment in it.

But the premise for said Cliff's Notes has nothing on which to stand. There is no evidence. Without evidence there is no case (in court) and no valid assertion (in debate).

Well bro..again this isnt a formal debate and it certainly isn't court proceedings. You will not find the judge or jury affirmed court level quality of proof here in the usmb.

 

[grainbely]

and of course my kids are grown but no way that i'd teach them to kiss azz Grainbely .

Theres a sharp difference between kissing ass and being cognizant and safe in your surroundings. Did you teach your kid to punch anyone that gives them a hard time? A punch can kill, you know. Also, first impressions are critical. Wouldnt want them tanking their first impression to the world.

----------------------------------------- I teach my kid to stand his ground like Nick did Grainbely .

Nick received death threats. His life was in danger. You would put your kid in danger like that? Bad parenting.

 

[Papageorgio]

I don't know if you remember any of the posts in previous threads weeks and months ago but I remember and some of the Lefties on this board were Gleefully saying that Sandman would be ruined for life because he and his Smiling Face are all over the internet whenever Nick tries looking for a job or going to a Prestigious University or say an Appointment to the Supreme Court or if he were to run for President . Point is that there are many lefties that will carry Sandman in their craw for years and try to ruin Nick anytime they can hurt him . ------------------------ Hang the lefty news media [URINALISTS] for all they are worth and also set a Precedent about the kinda reporting they do Grainbelly .

They sound like very poor excuses for liberals and Democrats..... You can find most of this hate only reported on Fox. If you watch MSNBC and CNN you don't even know who sandman is....

Just did a search of CNN and MSNBC and found a lot of stories done on Sandman, it seems your bias and more lies are coming up.

 

[pismoe]

I teach my male kid to stand up for himself is all it is . The world is not SAFE though you lefties are always looking for SAFETY Grainbely .

 

[pismoe]

bad parenting ,feck that , a guy can't and shouldn't always run and hide or appease .

 

[Pogo]

You don't know Shit you Super Duper Tard......

Any arguments? At all? I know we are not taxing the rich enough and we are falling apart. Opportunity is screwed, people did not just get lazy, super dupers.

I am amazed that a dumb ass tard like yourself can generate enough

brain power to type your bull shit…..

I would bet you couldn’t type and fart at the same time without blowing a fuse………

Do you understand simple math?

If I make a million a year and your dumb ass makes 100,000. a year, you do understand

that if we were both taxed at 10% I would pay 100,000. and your dumb ass would pay 10,000.

Later you Super Duper Shit….

oooOOooo, Haiku

He's just a greedy pos. You'd all hate that if it were reversed. Imo, award him a few mil and send him on his way. No reason for anything more when the average worker doesnt even make that in a lifetime and this kid as a maga doper is definitely falling into that category.

Is that because if it were reversed you'd be ecstatic?

I wouldnt be. The punishment should equal the crime. The only time I support a large settlement is when consequences are severe like certain death or drastic and permanent reduction in quality of life due to negligent or intentional malfeasance. I'm talking people being robbed of their livelihood and excessively traumatized. Or...smaller transgressions carried out en masse with a paper trail of diabolic intention.

In the case of this kid, he will live on just fine and has been mostly exonerated of any wrong doing. At worst, he has suffered some undue trauma and likely had to watch his back for a bit, so he does deserve something maybe in the low millions.

From who? For what?

Hey if I go stand nose-to-nose with somebody and smirk, can I get some low millions too? I'm not picky, I'll even take medium millions.

And here I thought you had to actually work for that sort of thing.

Some prominent jounalists and pundits framed the kid to be a bad guy before getting the full story. They got the story wrong...or not entirely correct..which lead to your standard social media pitchfork mob reigning down on the poor kid, his family, and school.

He's a minor. Smirking isnt a crime worthy of what he got in blowback which was generated by the misleading headlines and editorials. The kid got death threats. That isnt acceptable and the disseminators of the incorrect narrative are culpable.

What would you think would be the proper compensation? I think $250 million is way to high.

$0.00. And they have to pay for whatever legal fees the defense incurs. Which shouldn't be much since, having no evidence the suit will be immediately dismissed and one hopes, the attorneys sanctioned.

Why would standing in front of somebody smirking entitle "compensation"? Ever hear of "work"?

 

[Pogo]

I don't know if you remember any of the posts in previous threads weeks and months ago but I remember and some of the Lefties on this board were Gleefully saying that Sandman would be ruined for life because he and his Smiling Face are all over the internet whenever Nick tries looking for a job or going to a Prestigious University or say an Appointment to the Supreme Court or if he were to run for President . Point is that there are many lefties that will carry Sandman in their craw for years and try to ruin Nick anytime they can hurt him . ------------------------ Hang the lefty news media [URINALISTS] for all they are worth and also set a Precedent about the kinda reporting they do Grainbelly .

They sound like very poor excuses for liberals and Democrats..... You can find most of this hate only reported on Fox. If you watch MSNBC and CNN you don't even know who sandman is....

Just did a search of CNN and MSNBC and found a lot of stories done on Sandman, it seems your bias and more lies are coming up.

Did you find any that contained libel?

 

[grainbely]

You don't know Shit you Super Duper Tard......

Any arguments? At all? I know we are not taxing the rich enough and we are falling apart. Opportunity is screwed, people did not just get lazy, super dupers.

I am amazed that a dumb ass tard like yourself can generate enough

brain power to type your bull shit…..

I would bet you couldn’t type and fart at the same time without blowing a fuse………

Do you understand simple math?

If I make a million a year and your dumb ass makes 100,000. a year, you do understand

that if we were both taxed at 10% I would pay 100,000. and your dumb ass would pay 10,000.

Later you Super Duper Shit….

oooOOooo, Haiku

He's just a greedy pos. You'd all hate that if it were reversed. Imo, award him a few mil and send him on his way. No reason for anything more when the average worker doesnt even make that in a lifetime and this kid as a maga doper is definitely falling into that category.

Is that because if it were reversed you'd be ecstatic?

I wouldnt be. The punishment should equal the crime. The only time I support a large settlement is when consequences are severe like certain death or drastic and permanent reduction in quality of life due to negligent or intentional malfeasance. I'm talking people being robbed of their livelihood and excessively traumatized. Or...smaller transgressions carried out en masse with a paper trail of diabolic intention.

In the case of this kid, he will live on just fine and has been mostly exonerated of any wrong doing. At worst, he has suffered some undue trauma and likely had to watch his back for a bit, so he does deserve something maybe in the low millions.

From who? For what?

Hey if I go stand nose-to-nose with somebody and smirk, can I get some low millions too? I'm not picky, I'll even take medium millions.

And here I thought you had to actually work for that sort of thing.

Some prominent jounalists and pundits framed the kid to be a bad guy before getting the full story. They got the story wrong...or not entirely correct..which lead to your standard social media pitchfork mob reigning down on the poor kid, his family, and school.

He's a minor. Smirking isnt a crime worthy of what he got in blowback which was generated by the misleading headlines and editorials. The kid got death threats. That isnt acceptable and the disseminators of the incorrect narrative are culpable.

What would you think would be the proper compensation? I think $250 million is way to high.

As an armchair arbiter, I'd say 1 to 10 million from the culpable organization. The family has likely already incurred significant costs and the kid needs to be protected for awhile until the fringe crazies move on. Who knows maybe more comes out in the lawsuit.

 

[Pogo]

Any arguments? At all? I know we are not taxing the rich enough and we are falling apart. Opportunity is screwed, people did not just get lazy, super dupers.

I am amazed that a dumb ass tard like yourself can generate enough

brain power to type your bull shit…..

I would bet you couldn’t type and fart at the same time without blowing a fuse………

Do you understand simple math?

If I make a million a year and your dumb ass makes 100,000. a year, you do understand

that if we were both taxed at 10% I would pay 100,000. and your dumb ass would pay 10,000.

Later you Super Duper Shit….

oooOOooo, Haiku

Is that because if it were reversed you'd be ecstatic?

I wouldnt be. The punishment should equal the crime. The only time I support a large settlement is when consequences are severe like certain death or drastic and permanent reduction in quality of life due to negligent or intentional malfeasance. I'm talking people being robbed of their livelihood and excessively traumatized. Or...smaller transgressions carried out en masse with a paper trail of diabolic intention.

In the case of this kid, he will live on just fine and has been mostly exonerated of any wrong doing. At worst, he has suffered some undue trauma and likely had to watch his back for a bit, so he does deserve something maybe in the low millions.

From who? For what?

Hey if I go stand nose-to-nose with somebody and smirk, can I get some low millions too? I'm not picky, I'll even take medium millions.

And here I thought you had to actually work for that sort of thing.

Some prominent jounalists and pundits framed the kid to be a bad guy before getting the full story. They got the story wrong...or not entirely correct..which lead to your standard social media pitchfork mob reigning down on the poor kid, his family, and school.

He's a minor. Smirking isnt a crime worthy of what he got in blowback which was generated by the misleading headlines and editorials. The kid got death threats. That isnt acceptable and the disseminators of the incorrect narrative are culpable.

What would you think would be the proper compensation? I think $250 million is way to high.

As an armchair arbiter, I'd say 1 to 10 million from the culpable organization. The family has likely already incurred significant costs and the kid needs to be protected for awhile until the fringe crazies move on. Who knows maybe more comes out in the lawsuit.

See?? There you go again "awarding" 1 to 10 million on the basis of nothing.

That's why I keep asking for something more than nothing. You can't just give money away for nothing.

 

[pismoe]

I don't know if you remember any of the posts in previous threads weeks and months ago but I remember and some of the Lefties on this board were Gleefully saying that Sandman would be ruined for life because he and his Smiling Face are all over the internet whenever Nick tries looking for a job or going to a Prestigious University or say an Appointment to the Supreme Court or if he were to run for President . Point is that there are many lefties that will carry Sandman in their craw for years and try to ruin Nick anytime they can hurt him . ------------------------ Hang the lefty news media [URINALISTS] for all they are worth and also set a Precedent about the kinda reporting they do Grainbelly .

They sound like very poor excuses for liberals and Democrats..... You can find most of this hate only reported on Fox. If you watch MSNBC and CNN you don't even know who sandman is....

Just did a search of CNN and MSNBC and found a lot of stories done on Sandman, it seems your bias and more lies are coming up.

Did you find any that contained libel?

------------------------------------------ they happened , not looking , thing is going to go to Court so I'll just watch and see what happens Pogo .

 

[Pogo]

I don't know if you remember any of the posts in previous threads weeks and months ago but I remember and some of the Lefties on this board were Gleefully saying that Sandman would be ruined for life because he and his Smiling Face are all over the internet whenever Nick tries looking for a job or going to a Prestigious University or say an Appointment to the Supreme Court or if he were to run for President . Point is that there are many lefties that will carry Sandman in their craw for years and try to ruin Nick anytime they can hurt him . ------------------------ Hang the lefty news media [URINALISTS] for all they are worth and also set a Precedent about the kinda reporting they do Grainbelly .

They sound like very poor excuses for liberals and Democrats..... You can find most of this hate only reported on Fox. If you watch MSNBC and CNN you don't even know who sandman is....

Just did a search of CNN and MSNBC and found a lot of stories done on Sandman, it seems your bias and more lies are coming up.

Did you find any that contained libel?

------------------------------------------ they happened , not looking , thing is going to go to Court so I'll just watch and see what happens Pogo .

Yes, WE KNOW. You've told us three thousand seven hundred and fifty-eight times you'll "just wait and see".

And when nothing happens you'll see I was right.

 

[grainbely]

I am amazed that a dumb ass tard like yourself can generate enough

brain power to type your bull shit…..

I would bet you couldn’t type and fart at the same time without blowing a fuse………

Do you understand simple math?

If I make a million a year and your dumb ass makes 100,000. a year, you do understand

that if we were both taxed at 10% I would pay 100,000. and your dumb ass would pay 10,000.

Later you Super Duper Shit….

oooOOooo, Haiku

I wouldnt be. The punishment should equal the crime. The only time I support a large settlement is when consequences are severe like certain death or drastic and permanent reduction in quality of life due to negligent or intentional malfeasance. I'm talking people being robbed of their livelihood and excessively traumatized. Or...smaller transgressions carried out en masse with a paper trail of diabolic intention.

In the case of this kid, he will live on just fine and has been mostly exonerated of any wrong doing. At worst, he has suffered some undue trauma and likely had to watch his back for a bit, so he does deserve something maybe in the low millions.

From who? For what?

Hey if I go stand nose-to-nose with somebody and smirk, can I get some low millions too? I'm not picky, I'll even take medium millions.

And here I thought you had to actually work for that sort of thing.

Some prominent jounalists and pundits framed the kid to be a bad guy before getting the full story. They got the story wrong...or not entirely correct..which lead to your standard social media pitchfork mob reigning down on the poor kid, his family, and school.

He's a minor. Smirking isnt a crime worthy of what he got in blowback which was generated by the misleading headlines and editorials. The kid got death threats. That isnt acceptable and the disseminators of the incorrect narrative are culpable.

What would you think would be the proper compensation? I think $250 million is way to high.

As an armchair arbiter, I'd say 1 to 10 million from the culpable organization. The family has likely already incurred significant costs and the kid needs to be protected for awhile until the fringe crazies move on. Who knows maybe more comes out in the lawsuit.

See?? There you go again "awarding" 1 to 10 million on the basis of nothing.

That's why I keep asking for something more than nothing. You can't just give money away for nothing.

Yeah but I prefaced with self identifying as an armchair arbiter. You're arguing with someone that doesnt give a rip.

 

[Pogo]

oooOOooo, Haiku
From who? For what?

Hey if I go stand nose-to-nose with somebody and smirk, can I get some low millions too? I'm not picky, I'll even take medium millions.

And here I thought you had to actually work for that sort of thing.

Some prominent jounalists and pundits framed the kid to be a bad guy before getting the full story. They got the story wrong...or not entirely correct..which lead to your standard social media pitchfork mob reigning down on the poor kid, his family, and school.

He's a minor. Smirking isnt a crime worthy of what he got in blowback which was generated by the misleading headlines and editorials. The kid got death threats. That isnt acceptable and the disseminators of the incorrect narrative are culpable.

What would you think would be the proper compensation? I think $250 million is way to high.

As an armchair arbiter, I'd say 1 to 10 million from the culpable organization. The family has likely already incurred significant costs and the kid needs to be protected for awhile until the fringe crazies move on. Who knows maybe more comes out in the lawsuit.

See?? There you go again "awarding" 1 to 10 million on the basis of nothing.

That's why I keep asking for something more than nothing. You can't just give money away for nothing.

Yeah but I prefaced with self identifying as an armchair arbiter. You're arguing with someone that doesnt give a rip.

Well then, can I have 10 million for no reason? I take PayPal.

 

[OklaSusie]

Libel and slander aren’t free speech. You have to pay for it.

Then Trump is in deep shit if butthurt little Nicky wins

Cite examples.

Everybody he’s ever slandered on twitter, in speeaches, etc. For example, slandering Hillary by spending years calling her a criminal and murderer

She's a public figure, dumbass. Sandman is not.

This is a really smart lawyer "sue them all" let the courts sort out the losers. Bill Maher is dumbass, Kathy Griffin a female version I hope they lose their asses, to this Lawyer. Throw enough crap against the wall something is going to stick, They will remember his name!

Like the George Zimmerman lawsuit against NBC, all of these will be tossed. And Larry Flynt's win against Jerry Falwell will ensure Bill Maher and Kathy Griffin are protected.

Ironic, isn't it, that Republicans are cheering the kid's lawsuits, yet they were the ones to advocate caps on punitive damages, even if someone dies or is maimed thanks to a doctor or a corporation. But when it comes to suing CNN, well, f*** punitives.

Republicans remain hypocrites.

 

[Papageorgio]

Any arguments? At all? I know we are not taxing the rich enough and we are falling apart. Opportunity is screwed, people did not just get lazy, super dupers.

I am amazed that a dumb ass tard like yourself can generate enough

brain power to type your bull shit…..

I would bet you couldn’t type and fart at the same time without blowing a fuse………

Do you understand simple math?

If I make a million a year and your dumb ass makes 100,000. a year, you do understand

that if we were both taxed at 10% I would pay 100,000. and your dumb ass would pay 10,000.

Later you Super Duper Shit….

oooOOooo, Haiku

Is that because if it were reversed you'd be ecstatic?

I wouldnt be. The punishment should equal the crime. The only time I support a large settlement is when consequences are severe like certain death or drastic and permanent reduction in quality of life due to negligent or intentional malfeasance. I'm talking people being robbed of their livelihood and excessively traumatized. Or...smaller transgressions carried out en masse with a paper trail of diabolic intention.

In the case of this kid, he will live on just fine and has been mostly exonerated of any wrong doing. At worst, he has suffered some undue trauma and likely had to watch his back for a bit, so he does deserve something maybe in the low millions.

From who? For what?

Hey if I go stand nose-to-nose with somebody and smirk, can I get some low millions too? I'm not picky, I'll even take medium millions.

And here I thought you had to actually work for that sort of thing.

Some prominent jounalists and pundits framed the kid to be a bad guy before getting the full story. They got the story wrong...or not entirely correct..which lead to your standard social media pitchfork mob reigning down on the poor kid, his family, and school.

He's a minor. Smirking isnt a crime worthy of what he got in blowback which was generated by the misleading headlines and editorials. The kid got death threats. That isnt acceptable and the disseminators of the incorrect narrative are culpable.

What would you think would be the proper compensation? I think $250 million is way to high.

As an armchair arbiter, I'd say 1 to 10 million from the culpable organization. The family has likely already incurred significant costs and the kid needs to be protected for awhile until the fringe crazies move on. Who knows maybe more comes out in the lawsuit.

Until I see more of the case, I’m inclined to think $250,000 to $5 million, I can’t see a court going much more than that, however jury cases can be unpredictable.

 

[grainbely]

Some prominent jounalists and pundits framed the kid to be a bad guy before getting the full story. They got the story wrong...or not entirely correct..which lead to your standard social media pitchfork mob reigning down on the poor kid, his family, and school.

He's a minor. Smirking isnt a crime worthy of what he got in blowback which was generated by the misleading headlines and editorials. The kid got death threats. That isnt acceptable and the disseminators of the incorrect narrative are culpable.

What would you think would be the proper compensation? I think $250 million is way to high.

As an armchair arbiter, I'd say 1 to 10 million from the culpable organization. The family has likely already incurred significant costs and the kid needs to be protected for awhile until the fringe crazies move on. Who knows maybe more comes out in the lawsuit.

See?? There you go again "awarding" 1 to 10 million on the basis of nothing.

That's why I keep asking for something more than nothing. You can't just give money away for nothing.

Yeah but I prefaced with self identifying as an armchair arbiter. You're arguing with someone that doesnt give a rip.

Well then, can I have 10 million for no reason? I take PayPal.

I'll allow it. But I need a processing fee of 100 bucks cash dropped at the 3rd booth of Trump's fav DC McDonalds to be able to transfer the funds.