Jump to content

Washington Post is sued bigly by kid in “infamous” photo


NolaAuTiger

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

Please don't purposefully misquote me without making your edit clear.

It was clear to anyone with a brain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, AUFAN78 said:

It was clear to anyone with a brain.

Hince, his inability to see it...B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, homersapien said:

Like I said...

Which is why I called you on the nonsense. Doubling down? :homer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/26/washington-post-covington-high-school-student-defamation-case-dismissed-1437881

 

 

Quote

 

Covington student's defamation case against Washington Post is dismissed

A federal judge on Friday dismissed a multi-million dollar defamation lawsuit against The Washington Post over its coverage of an interaction between a Kentucky high school student and a Native American activist on the National Mall, which gained national attention after the video went viral.

 

more at the link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why we need to radically re-do the defamation laws in this country. 

1) This was probably expected and I am sure will be challenged. 

2) The NYT did imply that the student was menacing. He was not.

3) If the NYT can get away with this type of trash, then why bother reading the media. If there is no reason to do even minimal due diligence for truth and accuracy then I would have to assume that all media is jujst as inaccurate as this story was proved to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

This is why we need to radically re-do the defamation laws in this country. 

1) This was probably expected and I am sure will be challenged. 

2) The NYT did imply that the student was menacing. He was not.

3) If the NYT can get away with this type of trash, then why bother reading the media. If there is no reason to do even minimal due diligence for truth and accuracy then I would have to assume that all media is jujst as inaccurate as this story was proved to be.

 

Few people expect the truth or objectivity out of the MSM and courts seem to be of the same mind now though a smaller claim might have had a better chance.  The huge value of the suit made it seem frivolous perhaps...….but it was a case worth pursuing because they repeated the lie over and over and to my knowledge never admitted that got it wrong.

Not that long ago it was noted that "right to privacy" is not guaranteed ...and only the naïve expect the NYT or WAPO or other MSM outlets to print the truth these days.   They fact check others but who fact checks them?  NOBODY

NYT and others are agenda driven.....      will publish or broadcast whatever advances their agenda....while hiding behind the constitution.    So they are guaranteed the right of "free speech" but many of those news organs  see no corresponding obligation to speak the truth and courts are mostly backing them up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

This is why we need to radically re-do the defamation laws in this country. 

1) This was probably expected and I am sure will be challenged. 

2) The NYT did imply that the student was menacing. He was not.

3) If the NYT can get away with this type of trash, then why bother reading the media. If there is no reason to do even minimal due diligence for truth and accuracy then I would have to assume that all media is jujst as inaccurate as this story was proved to be.

What exactly did the NYT say that you think was defamation? Were they sued also? If so, what’s the status?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/01/20/us/nathan-phillips-covington.amp.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
Quote

Judge to allow portion of Nick Sandmann lawsuit against Washington Post to continue

Cameron Knight, Cincinnati EnquirerPublished 3:51 p.m. ET Oct. 28, 2019 | Updated 4:21 p.m. ET Oct. 28, 2019

 

 

A federal judge is allowing a portion of Covington Catholic student Nick Sandmann's lawsuit against the Washington Post to continue after first dismissing the case.

After reviewing an amended complaint, Judge William Bertelsman ordered Monday that the case could enter the discovery phase and hence a portion of the lawsuit against the newspaper could continue.

Nick and his attorneys had alleged that the gist of The Washington Post's first article conveyed that Nick had assaulted or physically intimidated Nathan Phillips and engaged in racist conduct.

A video of the encounter shows Sandmann and Phillips, a Native American who was demonstrating that day, standing close to each other in a crowd, and Sandmann staring at Phillips as he plays a drum. The situation unfolded after the Right to Life March in Washington D.C. on Jan. 18.

 

Sandmann's lawyers argue that the Washington Post incorrectly characterized the teen as the aggressor in the situation and exposed him to public ridicule.

Bertelsman said in the order that he stands by his decision that 30 of the 33 statements Sandmann's lawyers argued were damaging to Sandmann were not, but that "justice requires" further review of three of the statements.

"These three statements state that (Sandmann) 'blocked' Nathan Phillips and 'would not allow him to retreat,'" the order reads.

Bertelsman said the amended complaint also argues that Phillips "deliberately lied" and "had an unsavory reputation." The new complaint also states the Washington Post should have known about Phillips due to the previous coverage of him.

The judge's order that discovery can continue means Sandmann's legal team can make requests for internal Washington Post documents concerning the events like emails and communications between editors and reporters.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/crime/crime-and-courts/2019/10/28/cov-cath-judge-rules-lawsuit-against-washington-post-can-continue/2488732001/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now discovery starts. Please no one get carried away. I suspect at least 3-5 years of delays as the NYT cries for every journalistic allowance ever dreamed up. It is now 2019, this doesnt past discovery until 2024. At some point I expect everyone to tire of it and the NYT to make a cash deposit into the Sandmann's account and for the rest of the world to move on. The management now at the NYT wont be there when this ever, if ever, gets thru discovery. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
14 hours ago, AUDub said:

Define fat though.

From several sites I just trolled, the RUMORED settlement was $5-10M. 

They are bound by disclosure settlement and we will never know, but several media sites have estimates from $5-10M.

The lowest i found on 8 sites was "mid 6 figures." So $500K? 

There is no reason to quote anyone at this point, we should have a strong feel for it in a few weeks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/9/2020 at 9:02 AM, DKW 86 said:

From several sites I just trolled, the RUMORED settlement was $5-10M. 

They are bound by disclosure settlement and we will never know, but several media sites have estimates from $5-10M.

The lowest i found on 8 sites was "mid 6 figures." So $500K? 

There is no reason to quote anyone at this point, we should have a strong feel for it in a few weeks. 

OG post says 250M, I said 250k.... I bet I'm closer. :) :lol: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/11/2020 at 6:41 PM, Auburn85 said:

 

This guy is lying on national television and folks, he is doing an admirable job. its still lies, but he seems convincing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...