Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The most disappointing part of the incident (not the media coverage) is the failure of the chaperones then and no acknowledgement afterwards. The adults never seemed to realize how badly they messed up that day.

Poor kids, all of them.

Yes, ultimately the chaperones were responsible for those kids. They unleashed a swarm of DBs and failed to control them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Should have said "rigid and smiling" - the smile increases the menace as its not a real smile. He isnt happy, he isnt engaged in some joyful pursuit. That "smile" also sends a message, and not a nice one. Srriously, anyone who understands normal social clues can understand the teenager's message.

Agree completely. The kid's behavior is not respectful.

So here's the thing, folks.

It's YOUR interpretation of a smile.

So . . . a smile doesn't land you in jail.

lol - You wouldn't last a day teaching HS students.

Yes. People who lack social graces shouldn’t be jailed. But not being a crime does not make it any less disrespectful. And we can agree to disagree. No need to resort to attacks and insults.

[Anonymous]

No one is talking about putting anyone in jail. We are talking about if Sandmann has a case. And watching the NYT video, he doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one is talking about putting anyone in jail. We are talking about if Sandmann has a case. And watching the NYT video, he doesn't.

The judge disagrees.
The case moves forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most disappointing part of the incident (not the media coverage) is the failure of the chaperones then and no acknowledgement afterwards. The adults never seemed to realize how badly they messed up that day.

Poor kids, all of them.

Yes, ultimately the chaperones were responsible for those kids. They unleashed a swarm of DBs and failed to control them.

^^ truth. they sent the little sh*ts to try to take away my rights and didn't corral them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let him and his PWT family take on the WaPo.

BEST OF LUCK!

What’s PWT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most disappointing part of the incident (not the media coverage) is the failure of the chaperones then and no acknowledgement afterwards. The adults never seemed to realize how badly they messed up that day.

Poor kids, all of them.

Yes, ultimately the chaperones were responsible for those kids. They unleashed a swarm of DBs and failed to control them.

Interesting that you don’t call the Black “Israelites” DBs. Or Phillips for getting in the face of a kid for no reason. Why is that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Should have said "rigid and smiling" - the smile increases the menace as its not a real smile. He isnt happy, he isnt engaged in some joyful pursuit. That "smile" also sends a message, and not a nice one. Srriously, anyone who understands normal social clues can understand the teenager's message.

Agree completely. The kid's behavior is not respectful.

So here's the thing, folks.

It's YOUR interpretation of a smile.

So . . . a smile doesn't land you in jail.

lol - You wouldn't last a day teaching HS students.

Yes. People who lack social graces shouldn’t be jailed. But not being a crime does not make it any less disrespectful. And we can agree to disagree. No need to resort to attacks and insults.

DP. So what would you have preferred? You’re outraged that Sandman smiled, remained silent, and maintained eye contact with Phillips. Would you have preferred he scowl and shout obscenities? Why is it, exactly, you think this kid should have done after Phillips made a beeline for him, chanting and drumming in his face, in a clear attempt to intimidate Sandman? Do tell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most disappointing part of the incident (not the media coverage) is the failure of the chaperones then and no acknowledgement afterwards. The adults never seemed to realize how badly they messed up that day.

Poor kids, all of them.

Yes, ultimately the chaperones were responsible for those kids. They unleashed a swarm of DBs and failed to control them.

Interesting that you don’t call the Black “Israelites” DBs. Or Phillips for getting in the face of a kid for no reason. Why is that?

DP. Because they didn't file numerous ludicrous lawsuits asking for hundreds of millions of dollars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let him and his PWT family take on the WaPo.

BEST OF LUCK!

What’s PWT?

What DCUM calls people who are smarter than they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most disappointing part of the incident (not the media coverage) is the failure of the chaperones then and no acknowledgement afterwards. The adults never seemed to realize how badly they messed up that day.

Poor kids, all of them.

Yes, ultimately the chaperones were responsible for those kids. They unleashed a swarm of DBs and failed to control them.

Interesting that you don’t call the Black “Israelites” DBs. Or Phillips for getting in the face of a kid for no reason. Why is that?

DP. Because they didn't file numerous ludicrous lawsuits asking for hundreds of millions of dollars.

Perhaps because no one mischaracterized their gross behavior? It’s clear they were the antagonists, so really, they would have no case. Sandman was made out in the media as being the antagonist. He was not. Thus, he has a case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let him and his PWT family take on the WaPo.

BEST OF LUCK!

What a racist you are. What’s your clever nickname for the disgusting Black “Israelites”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most disappointing part of the incident (not the media coverage) is the failure of the chaperones then and no acknowledgement afterwards. The adults never seemed to realize how badly they messed up that day.

Poor kids, all of them.

Yes, ultimately the chaperones were responsible for those kids. They unleashed a swarm of DBs and failed to control them.

Interesting that you don’t call the Black “Israelites” DBs. Or Phillips for getting in the face of a kid for no reason. Why is that?

DP. Because they didn't file numerous ludicrous lawsuits asking for hundreds of millions of dollars.

Perhaps because no one mischaracterized their gross behavior? It’s clear they were the antagonists, so really, they would have no case. Sandman was made out in the media as being the antagonist. He was not. Thus, he has a case.

Is that what it's called when your initial complaint is thrown out in its entirety and an amended complaint is thrown out except for 3 claims?

Maybe he'll win. It's possible. But he (his lawyer) filed numerous ludicrous lawsuits asking for hundreds of millions of dollars, so I'll continue to laugh at him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Should have said "rigid and smiling" - the smile increases the menace as its not a real smile. He isnt happy, he isnt engaged in some joyful pursuit. That "smile" also sends a message, and not a nice one. Srriously, anyone who understands normal social clues can understand the teenager's message.

Agree completely. The kid's behavior is not respectful.

So here's the thing, folks.

It's YOUR interpretation of a smile.

So . . . a smile doesn't land you in jail.

lol - You wouldn't last a day teaching HS students.

Yes. People who lack social graces shouldn’t be jailed. But not being a crime does not make it any less disrespectful. And we can agree to disagree. No need to resort to attacks and insults.

DP. So what would you have preferred? You’re outraged that Sandman smiled, remained silent, and maintained eye contact with Phillips. Would you have preferred he scowl and shout obscenities? Why is it, exactly, you think this kid should have done after Phillips made a beeline for him, chanting and drumming in his face, in a clear attempt to intimidate Sandman? Do tell.

Walk away and take the "high road" if he really believed he was being confrontational or was fearful (here's a hint: he didn't think that). That's the problem when you waltz into town on your religious/moral high horse, dictating how other people should act: people expect you to act like it and not just when it's convenient. Big fail on that kid and that school for not teaching or preparing them better on that front.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Should have said "rigid and smiling" - the smile increases the menace as its not a real smile. He isnt happy, he isnt engaged in some joyful pursuit. That "smile" also sends a message, and not a nice one. Srriously, anyone who understands normal social clues can understand the teenager's message.

Agree completely. The kid's behavior is not respectful.

So here's the thing, folks.

It's YOUR interpretation of a smile.

So . . . a smile doesn't land you in jail.

lol - You wouldn't last a day teaching HS students.

Yes. People who lack social graces shouldn’t be jailed. But not being a crime does not make it any less disrespectful. And we can agree to disagree. No need to resort to attacks and insults.

DP. So what would you have preferred? You’re outraged that Sandman smiled, remained silent, and maintained eye contact with Phillips. Would you have preferred he scowl and shout obscenities? Why is it, exactly, you think this kid should have done after Phillips made a beeline for him, chanting and drumming in his face, in a clear attempt to intimidate Sandman? Do tell.

Walk away and take the "high road" if he really believed he was being confrontational or was fearful (here's a hint: he didn't think that). That's the problem when you waltz into town on your religious/moral high horse, dictating how other people should act: people expect you to act like it and not just when it's convenient. Big fail on that kid and that school for not teaching or preparing them better on that front.

Oh, please. He didn’t “waltz into town” on any high horse. I’m pro-choice and he had as much right to protest/march as anyone else. Kind of sounds like you’re saying only people who agree with YOU should have the right to express themselves through protest. That’s not how it works.

As for how he acted with Phillips, I don’t blame him for simply standing still. Phillips claims he was heading up to the Lincoln Memorial which is clearly BS. He had a clear path up the steps to the memorial but chose instead to deliberately target the student group and specifically, Sandman. Sandman didn’t need to move - Phillips did.