They Were Warned: Covington Catholic teen sues 54 news outlets, lawmakers and celebrities

[rightwinger]

MAGA boy was criticized for his behavior

Nothing illegal about that

His behavior was beyond reproach, and people like you are slandering him. You could probably be sued as well.

Once again you demonstrate you have no idea what slander is

Try again

It's lying about someone in print or on video. That's what you just did.

Definition of SLANDER

1: the utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and damage another's reputation

2 : a false and defamatory oral statement about a person​

Finger Boy

You keep embarrassing yourself
Where did I utter false charges or make a defamatory oral statement?

you told him he didn't know what slander was.

he gave you the definition. now you're taking it personal.

and then the left wonders why we have these "communication" issues.

WRONG

He accused me of slander and I said he obviously did not know what it means

The definition he provided proved my point

 

[rightwinger]

They were warned - just apologize, admit you were wrong, and it all goes away. Nope.....

It will be an up-hill battle, but if they get Jury Trials, as much as Americans hate Fake-News right now, they could stand to make a ton of money.

Forget the money - Just the negative publicity alone for attacking children with / over fake news simply because they wore a hat supporting the President of the United States, choosing to ignore the 'Stolen Valor Vet' and Black Hate Group to do so, will be damaging.

“I think the whole fighting-back part benefits Sandmann in some way, to restore his reputation in the court of public opinion as well as in the court of law,” said Clay Calvert, who teaches media law at the University of Florida.'

Nick Sandmann, Covington Catholic teen, begins legal battle against media, celebrities

It's gonna be fun when those parents are left with the legal bills.

Truly! Not to mention, they have no case.

In order to prove "libel", you have to prove a few things:

1. First off, you have to prove the writer lied, on purpose, and that they did so "with malice". In other words, they deliberately set out to harm you;

2. Next, you have to prove "damages" or "loss" because of the slander. Since these boys are high school students, they didn't lose their jobs, their income, or have any sort of financial loss, because they're children.

3. Considering that the Catholic high school publically announced these children would be disciplined, lends credence to the idea that there was no mis-reporting, and no slander.

If I got one of those letters, I'd laugh and toss it into the round filer.

The Church that runs the school is also being sued, so that argument goes down the tubes.

Nick Sandmann's lawyers can easily prove damages. They don't have to be immediate to be valid.

In the case of Nick Sandmann, his lawyer doesn't have to prove actual malice because Sandman didn't choose to become a public figure.

Club 54: Sandmann attorneys threaten dozens with legal action for Covington coverage

The process would likely have to be the point. Libel and slander laws make it tough to win, even for non-public persons such as Sandmann. Sullivan doesn’t apply in this case; the respondents in the prospective lawsuits made Sandmann into a public figure without participation from him. That relieves the plaintiff from having to establish “actual malice” toward Sandmann, but they would still have to prove that these media outlets and individuals acted with some form of malice to prevail.
​

Sandman was criticized for his actions
That is neither slander or libel

Your silly smirk makes you look like a jerk is not slanderous. It is a statement of opinion

 

[easyt65]

I'm wondering if its Catholics is general, Catholic Schools - perhaps because she still has flashbacks from getting the ruler to the hand punishment by some strict Nunn, or if its just children that she hates, based on her seemingly strong support for killing children after birth and for going after kids with fake news and calls for burning them alive / throwing them into wood chippers........

hmmmmm......

 

[bripat9643]

They were warned - just apologize, admit you were wrong, and it all goes away. Nope.....

It will be an up-hill battle, but if they get Jury Trials, as much as Americans hate Fake-News right now, they could stand to make a ton of money.

Forget the money - Just the negative publicity alone for attacking children with / over fake news simply because they wore a hat supporting the President of the United States, choosing to ignore the 'Stolen Valor Vet' and Black Hate Group to do so, will be damaging.

“I think the whole fighting-back part benefits Sandmann in some way, to restore his reputation in the court of public opinion as well as in the court of law,” said Clay Calvert, who teaches media law at the University of Florida.'

Nick Sandmann, Covington Catholic teen, begins legal battle against media, celebrities

It's gonna be fun when those parents are left with the legal bills.

Truly! Not to mention, they have no case.

In order to prove "libel", you have to prove a few things:

1. First off, you have to prove the writer lied, on purpose, and that they did so "with malice". In other words, they deliberately set out to harm you;

2. Next, you have to prove "damages" or "loss" because of the slander. Since these boys are high school students, they didn't lose their jobs, their income, or have any sort of financial loss, because they're children.

3. Considering that the Catholic high school publically announced these children would be disciplined, lends credence to the idea that there was no mis-reporting, and no slander.

If I got one of those letters, I'd laugh and toss it into the round filer.

The Church that runs the school is also being sued, so that argument goes down the tubes.

Nick Sandmann's lawyers can easily prove damages. They don't have to be immediate to be valid.

In the case of Nick Sandmann, his lawyer doesn't have to prove actual malice because Sandman didn't choose to become a public figure.

Club 54: Sandmann attorneys threaten dozens with legal action for Covington coverage

The process would likely have to be the point. Libel and slander laws make it tough to win, even for non-public persons such as Sandmann. Sullivan doesn’t apply in this case; the respondents in the prospective lawsuits made Sandmann into a public figure without participation from him. That relieves the plaintiff from having to establish “actual malice” toward Sandmann, but they would still have to prove that these media outlets and individuals acted with some form of malice to prevail.
​

Sandman was criticized for his actions
That is neither slander or libel

Your silly smirk makes you look like a jerk is not slanderous. It is a statement of opinion

The people being sued lied about his actions. So did you. He could sue you if he wanted to. You're defaming him on a public forum. You'd better get your ducks in a row and stop lying about him before you receive a summons.

 

[bripat9643]

They were warned - just apologize, admit you were wrong, and it all goes away. Nope.....

It will be an up-hill battle, but if they get Jury Trials, as much as Americans hate Fake-News right now, they could stand to make a ton of money.

Forget the money - Just the negative publicity alone for attacking children with / over fake news simply because they wore a hat supporting the President of the United States, choosing to ignore the 'Stolen Valor Vet' and Black Hate Group to do so, will be damaging.

“I think the whole fighting-back part benefits Sandmann in some way, to restore his reputation in the court of public opinion as well as in the court of law,” said Clay Calvert, who teaches media law at the University of Florida.'

Nick Sandmann, Covington Catholic teen, begins legal battle against media, celebrities

It's gonna be fun when those parents are left with the legal bills.

Truly! Not to mention, they have no case.

In order to prove "libel", you have to prove a few things:

1. First off, you have to prove the writer lied, on purpose, and that they did so "with malice". In other words, they deliberately set out to harm you;

2. Next, you have to prove "damages" or "loss" because of the slander. Since these boys are high school students, they didn't lose their jobs, their income, or have any sort of financial loss, because they're children.

3. Considering that the Catholic high school publically announced these children would be disciplined, lends credence to the idea that there was no mis-reporting, and no slander.

If I got one of those letters, I'd laugh and toss it into the round filer.

I said he acted like an ass.
Because he acted like an ass.

I hope they sue me. It would be fun.

You have been lying about what he actually did, so you could be sued for libel. However, you don't have enough money to make it worth his while.

 

[bendog]

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/rcgs3/robot/4/c/7/2/f/4c72f31118a69f94c68e46ccd4.jpg

 

[rightwinger]

They were warned - just apologize, admit you were wrong, and it all goes away. Nope.....

It will be an up-hill battle, but if they get Jury Trials, as much as Americans hate Fake-News right now, they could stand to make a ton of money.

Forget the money - Just the negative publicity alone for attacking children with / over fake news simply because they wore a hat supporting the President of the United States, choosing to ignore the 'Stolen Valor Vet' and Black Hate Group to do so, will be damaging.

“I think the whole fighting-back part benefits Sandmann in some way, to restore his reputation in the court of public opinion as well as in the court of law,” said Clay Calvert, who teaches media law at the University of Florida.'

Nick Sandmann, Covington Catholic teen, begins legal battle against media, celebrities

It's gonna be fun when those parents are left with the legal bills.

Truly! Not to mention, they have no case.

In order to prove "libel", you have to prove a few things:

1. First off, you have to prove the writer lied, on purpose, and that they did so "with malice". In other words, they deliberately set out to harm you;

2. Next, you have to prove "damages" or "loss" because of the slander. Since these boys are high school students, they didn't lose their jobs, their income, or have any sort of financial loss, because they're children.

3. Considering that the Catholic high school publically announced these children would be disciplined, lends credence to the idea that there was no mis-reporting, and no slander.

If I got one of those letters, I'd laugh and toss it into the round filer.

The Church that runs the school is also being sued, so that argument goes down the tubes.

Nick Sandmann's lawyers can easily prove damages. They don't have to be immediate to be valid.

In the case of Nick Sandmann, his lawyer doesn't have to prove actual malice because Sandman didn't choose to become a public figure.

Club 54: Sandmann attorneys threaten dozens with legal action for Covington coverage

The process would likely have to be the point. Libel and slander laws make it tough to win, even for non-public persons such as Sandmann. Sullivan doesn’t apply in this case; the respondents in the prospective lawsuits made Sandmann into a public figure without participation from him. That relieves the plaintiff from having to establish “actual malice” toward Sandmann, but they would still have to prove that these media outlets and individuals acted with some form of malice to prevail.
​

Sandman was criticized for his actions
That is neither slander or libel

Your silly smirk makes you look like a jerk is not slanderous. It is a statement of opinion

The people being sued lied about his actions. So did you. He could sue you if he wanted to. You're defaming him on a public forum. You'd better get your ducks in a row and stop lying about him before you receive a summons.

Saying he looked like a smug little jerk is not a lie

 

[candycorn]

They were warned - just apologize, admit you were wrong, and it all goes away. Nope.....

It will be an up-hill battle, but if they get Jury Trials, as much as Americans hate Fake-News right now, they could stand to make a ton of money.

Forget the money - Just the negative publicity alone for attacking children with / over fake news simply because they wore a hat supporting the President of the United States, choosing to ignore the 'Stolen Valor Vet' and Black Hate Group to do so, will be damaging.

“I think the whole fighting-back part benefits Sandmann in some way, to restore his reputation in the court of public opinion as well as in the court of law,” said Clay Calvert, who teaches media law at the University of Florida.'

Nick Sandmann, Covington Catholic teen, begins legal battle against media, celebrities

It's gonna be fun when those parents are left with the legal bills.

Truly! Not to mention, they have no case.

In order to prove "libel", you have to prove a few things:

1. First off, you have to prove the writer lied, on purpose, and that they did so "with malice". In other words, they deliberately set out to harm you;

2. Next, you have to prove "damages" or "loss" because of the slander. Since these boys are high school students, they didn't lose their jobs, their income, or have any sort of financial loss, because they're children.

3. Considering that the Catholic high school publically announced these children would be disciplined, lends credence to the idea that there was no mis-reporting, and no slander.

If I got one of those letters, I'd laugh and toss it into the round filer.

I said he acted like an ass.
Because he acted like an ass.

I hope they sue me. It would be fun.

You have been lying about what he actually did, so you could be sued for libel. However, you don't have enough money to make it worth his while.

Bring it on dickless

 

[iceberg]

I'm wondering if its Catholics is general, Catholic Schools - perhaps because she still has flashbacks from getting the ruler to the hand punishment by some strict Nunn, or if its just children that she hates, based on her seemingly strong support for killing children after birth and for going after kids with fake news and calls for burning them alive / throwing them into wood chippers........

hmmmmm......

i went to a private catholic school til the 6th grade. never once did i have my knuckles slapped with a ruler.

 

[easyt65]

i went to a private catholic school til the 6th grade. never once did i have my knuckles slapped with a ruler.

(Just Kidding!)

 

[Dragonlady]

They were warned - just apologize, admit you were wrong, and it all goes away. Nope.....

It will be an up-hill battle, but if they get Jury Trials, as much as Americans hate Fake-News right now, they could stand to make a ton of money.

Forget the money - Just the negative publicity alone for attacking children with / over fake news simply because they wore a hat supporting the President of the United States, choosing to ignore the 'Stolen Valor Vet' and Black Hate Group to do so, will be damaging.

“I think the whole fighting-back part benefits Sandmann in some way, to restore his reputation in the court of public opinion as well as in the court of law,” said Clay Calvert, who teaches media law at the University of Florida.'

Nick Sandmann, Covington Catholic teen, begins legal battle against media, celebrities

It's gonna be fun when those parents are left with the legal bills.

Truly! Not to mention, they have no case.

In order to prove "libel", you have to prove a few things:

1. First off, you have to prove the writer lied, on purpose, and that they did so "with malice". In other words, they deliberately set out to harm you;

2. Next, you have to prove "damages" or "loss" because of the slander. Since these boys are high school students, they didn't lose their jobs, their income, or have any sort of financial loss, because they're children.

3. Considering that the Catholic high school publically announced these children would be disciplined, lends credence to the idea that there was no mis-reporting, and no slander.

If I got one of those letters, I'd laugh and toss it into the round filer.

The Church that runs the school is also being sued, so that argument goes down the tubes.

Nick Sandmann's lawyers can easily prove damages. They don't have to be immediate to be valid.

In the case of Nick Sandmann, his lawyer doesn't have to prove actual malice because Sandman didn't choose to become a public figure.

Club 54: Sandmann attorneys threaten dozens with legal action for Covington coverage

The process would likely have to be the point. Libel and slander laws make it tough to win, even for non-public persons such as Sandmann. Sullivan doesn’t apply in this case; the respondents in the prospective lawsuits made Sandmann into a public figure without participation from him. That relieves the plaintiff from having to establish “actual malice” toward Sandmann, but they would still have to prove that these media outlets and individuals acted with some form of malice to prevail.
​

Sandman was criticized for his actions
That is neither slander or libel

Your silly smirk makes you look like a jerk is not slanderous. It is a statement of opinion

The people being sued lied about his actions. So did you. He could sue you if he wanted to. You're defaming him on a public forum. You'd better get your ducks in a row and stop lying about him before you receive a summons.

NO ONE has been sued, and no on is being sued. Get over that notion. It's not going to happen.

The lawyers sent out "chill letters" intended to make people stop talking about his client on threat of law suit. It's not going to work. I personally find it offensive that the parents of these children hire a public relations firm and a team of lawyers to defend their little brats, there claiming white privelege to an extent and degree seldom seen.

It is Nathan Phillips who is being slandered here by these so-called "Christian" families and their rich people's army of spin doctors, lawyers and liars. Sandman is not and has never been a "public figure". Getting his name splashed all over social medial doesn't make him a public figure, so that dog will not hunt.

These spoilt brats and their obnoxious parents are going to get bitch slapped into next week for these elitist, racist and frankly, lying tactics. I hope they're bankrupted by it.

 

[bodecea]

They were warned - just apologize, admit you were wrong, and it all goes away. Nope.....

It will be an up-hill battle, but if they get Jury Trials, as much as Americans hate Fake-News right now, they could stand to make a ton of money.

Forget the money - Just the negative publicity alone for attacking children with / over fake news simply because they wore a hat supporting the President of the United States, choosing to ignore the 'Stolen Valor Vet' and Black Hate Group to do so, will be damaging.

“I think the whole fighting-back part benefits Sandmann in some way, to restore his reputation in the court of public opinion as well as in the court of law,” said Clay Calvert, who teaches media law at the University of Florida.'

Nick Sandmann, Covington Catholic teen, begins legal battle against media, celebrities

It's gonna be fun when those parents are left with the legal bills.

Truly! Not to mention, they have no case.

In order to prove "libel", you have to prove a few things:

1. First off, you have to prove the writer lied, on purpose, and that they did so "with malice". In other words, they deliberately set out to harm you;

2. Next, you have to prove "damages" or "loss" because of the slander. Since these boys are high school students, they didn't lose their jobs, their income, or have any sort of financial loss, because they're children.

3. Considering that the Catholic high school publically announced these children would be disciplined, lends credence to the idea that there was no mis-reporting, and no slander.

If I got one of those letters, I'd laugh and toss it into the round filer.

The Church that runs the school is also being sued, so that argument goes down the tubes.

Nick Sandmann's lawyers can easily prove damages. They don't have to be immediate to be valid.

In the case of Nick Sandmann, his lawyer doesn't have to prove actual malice because Sandman didn't choose to become a public figure.

Club 54: Sandmann attorneys threaten dozens with legal action for Covington coverage

The process would likely have to be the point. Libel and slander laws make it tough to win, even for non-public persons such as Sandmann. Sullivan doesn’t apply in this case; the respondents in the prospective lawsuits made Sandmann into a public figure without participation from him. That relieves the plaintiff from having to establish “actual malice” toward Sandmann, but they would still have to prove that these media outlets and individuals acted with some form of malice to prevail.
​

Sandman was criticized for his actions
That is neither slander or libel

Your silly smirk makes you look like a jerk is not slanderous. It is a statement of opinion

The people being sued lied about his actions. So did you. He could sue you if he wanted to. You're defaming him on a public forum. You'd better get your ducks in a row and stop lying about him before you receive a summons.

"he could sue you if he wanted to".......

 

[Thinker101]

It's gonna be fun when those parents are left with the legal bills.

Truly! Not to mention, they have no case.

In order to prove "libel", you have to prove a few things:

1. First off, you have to prove the writer lied, on purpose, and that they did so "with malice". In other words, they deliberately set out to harm you;

2. Next, you have to prove "damages" or "loss" because of the slander. Since these boys are high school students, they didn't lose their jobs, their income, or have any sort of financial loss, because they're children.

3. Considering that the Catholic high school publically announced these children would be disciplined, lends credence to the idea that there was no mis-reporting, and no slander.

If I got one of those letters, I'd laugh and toss it into the round filer.

The Church that runs the school is also being sued, so that argument goes down the tubes.

Nick Sandmann's lawyers can easily prove damages. They don't have to be immediate to be valid.

In the case of Nick Sandmann, his lawyer doesn't have to prove actual malice because Sandman didn't choose to become a public figure.

Club 54: Sandmann attorneys threaten dozens with legal action for Covington coverage

The process would likely have to be the point. Libel and slander laws make it tough to win, even for non-public persons such as Sandmann. Sullivan doesn’t apply in this case; the respondents in the prospective lawsuits made Sandmann into a public figure without participation from him. That relieves the plaintiff from having to establish “actual malice” toward Sandmann, but they would still have to prove that these media outlets and individuals acted with some form of malice to prevail.
​

Sandman was criticized for his actions
That is neither slander or libel

Your silly smirk makes you look like a jerk is not slanderous. It is a statement of opinion

The people being sued lied about his actions. So did you. He could sue you if he wanted to. You're defaming him on a public forum. You'd better get your ducks in a row and stop lying about him before you receive a summons.

NO ONE has been sued, and no on is being sued. Get over that notion. It's not going to happen.

The lawyers sent out "chill letters" intended to make people stop talking about his client on threat of law suit. It's not going to work. I personally find it offensive that the parents of these children hire a public relations firm and a team of lawyers to defend their little brats, there claiming white privelege to an extent and degree seldom seen.

It is Nathan Phillips who is being slandered here by these so-called "Christian" families and their rich people's army of spin doctors, lawyers and liars. Sandman is not and has never been a "public figure". Getting his name splashed all over social medial doesn't make him a public figure, so that dog will not hunt.

These spoilt brats and their obnoxious parents are going to get bitch slapped into next week for these elitist, racist and frankly, lying tactics. I hope they're bankrupted by it.

Get back to us when you figure out the legal process...dumbass.
Covington high school student, lawyers prepare for possible libel fight, release video of 'the truth'

 

[easyt65]

These spoilt brats and their obnoxious parents are going to get bitch slapped into next week for these elitist, racist and frankly, lying tactics. I hope they're bankrupted by it.

Yeah, they should all be burnt alive or thrown head first into a wood chipper, right?



Your hatred for babies and kids, especially for ones who wear 'MAGA' hats and who are 'arrogant' enough to 'just stand there' and 'smile', is duly noted.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm wondering if its Catholics is general, Catholic Schools - perhaps because she still has flashbacks from getting the ruler to the hand punishment by some strict Nunn, or if its just children that she hates, based on her seemingly strong support for killing children after birth and for going after kids with fake news and calls for burning them alive / throwing them into wood chippers........

hmmmmm......

i went to a private catholic school til the 6th grade. never once did i have my knuckles slapped with a ruler.

Kiss ass

 

[rightwinger]

Truly! Not to mention, they have no case.

In order to prove "libel", you have to prove a few things:

1. First off, you have to prove the writer lied, on purpose, and that they did so "with malice". In other words, they deliberately set out to harm you;

2. Next, you have to prove "damages" or "loss" because of the slander. Since these boys are high school students, they didn't lose their jobs, their income, or have any sort of financial loss, because they're children.

3. Considering that the Catholic high school publically announced these children would be disciplined, lends credence to the idea that there was no mis-reporting, and no slander.

If I got one of those letters, I'd laugh and toss it into the round filer.

The Church that runs the school is also being sued, so that argument goes down the tubes.

Nick Sandmann's lawyers can easily prove damages. They don't have to be immediate to be valid.

In the case of Nick Sandmann, his lawyer doesn't have to prove actual malice because Sandman didn't choose to become a public figure.

Club 54: Sandmann attorneys threaten dozens with legal action for Covington coverage

The process would likely have to be the point. Libel and slander laws make it tough to win, even for non-public persons such as Sandmann. Sullivan doesn’t apply in this case; the respondents in the prospective lawsuits made Sandmann into a public figure without participation from him. That relieves the plaintiff from having to establish “actual malice” toward Sandmann, but they would still have to prove that these media outlets and individuals acted with some form of malice to prevail.
​

Sandman was criticized for his actions
That is neither slander or libel

Your silly smirk makes you look like a jerk is not slanderous. It is a statement of opinion

The people being sued lied about his actions. So did you. He could sue you if he wanted to. You're defaming him on a public forum. You'd better get your ducks in a row and stop lying about him before you receive a summons.

NO ONE has been sued, and no on is being sued. Get over that notion. It's not going to happen.

The lawyers sent out "chill letters" intended to make people stop talking about his client on threat of law suit. It's not going to work. I personally find it offensive that the parents of these children hire a public relations firm and a team of lawyers to defend their little brats, there claiming white privelege to an extent and degree seldom seen.

It is Nathan Phillips who is being slandered here by these so-called "Christian" families and their rich people's army of spin doctors, lawyers and liars. Sandman is not and has never been a "public figure". Getting his name splashed all over social medial doesn't make him a public figure, so that dog will not hunt.

These spoilt brats and their obnoxious parents are going to get bitch slapped into next week for these elitist, racist and frankly, lying tactics. I hope they're bankrupted by it.

Get back to us when you figure out the legal process...dumbass.
Covington high school student, lawyers prepare for possible libel fight, release video of 'the truth'

The media released the video evidence they had at the time
It was not altered or doctored in any way.

They are free to draw conclusions on the evidence they have ...as is the public.

MAGA boy is no angel

 

[rightwinger]

They were warned - just apologize, admit you were wrong, and it all goes away. Nope.....

It will be an up-hill battle, but if they get Jury Trials, as much as Americans hate Fake-News right now, they could stand to make a ton of money.

Forget the money - Just the negative publicity alone for attacking children with / over fake news simply because they wore a hat supporting the President of the United States, choosing to ignore the 'Stolen Valor Vet' and Black Hate Group to do so, will be damaging.

“I think the whole fighting-back part benefits Sandmann in some way, to restore his reputation in the court of public opinion as well as in the court of law,” said Clay Calvert, who teaches media law at the University of Florida.'

Nick Sandmann, Covington Catholic teen, begins legal battle against media, celebrities

It's gonna be fun when those parents are left with the legal bills.

Truly! Not to mention, they have no case.

In order to prove "libel", you have to prove a few things:

1. First off, you have to prove the writer lied, on purpose, and that they did so "with malice". In other words, they deliberately set out to harm you;

2. Next, you have to prove "damages" or "loss" because of the slander. Since these boys are high school students, they didn't lose their jobs, their income, or have any sort of financial loss, because they're children.

3. Considering that the Catholic high school publically announced these children would be disciplined, lends credence to the idea that there was no mis-reporting, and no slander.

If I got one of those letters, I'd laugh and toss it into the round filer.

I said he acted like an ass.
Because he acted like an ass.

I hope they sue me. It would be fun.

You have been lying about what he actually did, so you could be sued for libel. However, you don't have enough money to make it worth his while.

Show the lie

 

[Thinker101]

The Church that runs the school is also being sued, so that argument goes down the tubes.

Nick Sandmann's lawyers can easily prove damages. They don't have to be immediate to be valid.

In the case of Nick Sandmann, his lawyer doesn't have to prove actual malice because Sandman didn't choose to become a public figure.

Club 54: Sandmann attorneys threaten dozens with legal action for Covington coverage

The process would likely have to be the point. Libel and slander laws make it tough to win, even for non-public persons such as Sandmann. Sullivan doesn’t apply in this case; the respondents in the prospective lawsuits made Sandmann into a public figure without participation from him. That relieves the plaintiff from having to establish “actual malice” toward Sandmann, but they would still have to prove that these media outlets and individuals acted with some form of malice to prevail.
​

Sandman was criticized for his actions
That is neither slander or libel

Your silly smirk makes you look like a jerk is not slanderous. It is a statement of opinion

The people being sued lied about his actions. So did you. He could sue you if he wanted to. You're defaming him on a public forum. You'd better get your ducks in a row and stop lying about him before you receive a summons.

NO ONE has been sued, and no on is being sued. Get over that notion. It's not going to happen.

The lawyers sent out "chill letters" intended to make people stop talking about his client on threat of law suit. It's not going to work. I personally find it offensive that the parents of these children hire a public relations firm and a team of lawyers to defend their little brats, there claiming white privelege to an extent and degree seldom seen.

It is Nathan Phillips who is being slandered here by these so-called "Christian" families and their rich people's army of spin doctors, lawyers and liars. Sandman is not and has never been a "public figure". Getting his name splashed all over social medial doesn't make him a public figure, so that dog will not hunt.

These spoilt brats and their obnoxious parents are going to get bitch slapped into next week for these elitist, racist and frankly, lying tactics. I hope they're bankrupted by it.

Get back to us when you figure out the legal process...dumbass.
Covington high school student, lawyers prepare for possible libel fight, release video of 'the truth'

The media released the video evidence they had at the time
It was not altered or doctored in any way.

They are free to draw conclusions on the evidence they have ...as is the public.

MAGA boy is no angel

Save it for the courtroom Columbo.

 

[rightwinger]

Sandman was criticized for his actions
That is neither slander or libel

Your silly smirk makes you look like a jerk is not slanderous. It is a statement of opinion

The people being sued lied about his actions. So did you. He could sue you if he wanted to. You're defaming him on a public forum. You'd better get your ducks in a row and stop lying about him before you receive a summons.

NO ONE has been sued, and no on is being sued. Get over that notion. It's not going to happen.

The lawyers sent out "chill letters" intended to make people stop talking about his client on threat of law suit. It's not going to work. I personally find it offensive that the parents of these children hire a public relations firm and a team of lawyers to defend their little brats, there claiming white privelege to an extent and degree seldom seen.

It is Nathan Phillips who is being slandered here by these so-called "Christian" families and their rich people's army of spin doctors, lawyers and liars. Sandman is not and has never been a "public figure". Getting his name splashed all over social medial doesn't make him a public figure, so that dog will not hunt.

These spoilt brats and their obnoxious parents are going to get bitch slapped into next week for these elitist, racist and frankly, lying tactics. I hope they're bankrupted by it.

Get back to us when you figure out the legal process...dumbass.
Covington high school student, lawyers prepare for possible libel fight, release video of 'the truth'

The media released the video evidence they had at the time
It was not altered or doctored in any way.

They are free to draw conclusions on the evidence they have ...as is the public.

MAGA boy is no angel

Save it for the courtroom Columbo.

Though I am not a lawyer, I do watch Judge Judy every day

The kid does not have a case

 

[Thinker101]

The people being sued lied about his actions. So did you. He could sue you if he wanted to. You're defaming him on a public forum. You'd better get your ducks in a row and stop lying about him before you receive a summons.

NO ONE has been sued, and no on is being sued. Get over that notion. It's not going to happen.

The lawyers sent out "chill letters" intended to make people stop talking about his client on threat of law suit. It's not going to work. I personally find it offensive that the parents of these children hire a public relations firm and a team of lawyers to defend their little brats, there claiming white privelege to an extent and degree seldom seen.

It is Nathan Phillips who is being slandered here by these so-called "Christian" families and their rich people's army of spin doctors, lawyers and liars. Sandman is not and has never been a "public figure". Getting his name splashed all over social medial doesn't make him a public figure, so that dog will not hunt.

These spoilt brats and their obnoxious parents are going to get bitch slapped into next week for these elitist, racist and frankly, lying tactics. I hope they're bankrupted by it.

Get back to us when you figure out the legal process...dumbass.
Covington high school student, lawyers prepare for possible libel fight, release video of 'the truth'

The media released the video evidence they had at the time
It was not altered or doctored in any way.

They are free to draw conclusions on the evidence they have ...as is the public.

MAGA boy is no angel

Save it for the courtroom Columbo.

Though I am not a lawyer, I do watch Judge Judy every day

The kid does not have a case

Yea, Columbo is not a lawyer either. Every day? Hell, with that experience you're almost there.