Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was video filmed from a position behind Sandmann, where you can hear him and his friend joking around about the Native Americans as he's standing in front of the drummer. You can also see the chaperones waving at him it's time to leave, which Sandmann ignores so he can continue staring at the drummer.

Nothing that was said about Nick Sandmann was false.

Post that video. We'll wait.

There were so many videos at the time of these boys whistling at and harassing women walking to lunch.

They disgust me.

My kids are at a Catholic school and I’d be embarrassed if these were my kids.

Post the videos as evidence to back your statement please.

You think I saved every video of those horrid boys abusing women on the street.

You never saw the video of the Hakka?

Do you have the 50 videos from that day?

DP. Why are you fixated on the haka? It was a school cheer.

Are they from New Zealand?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if that had been your teen-aged son encountering these grown ass men behaving badly? Would you have expected your son to handle the situation better than this kid did - so that anyone filming the encounter would have said his behavior was perfect? He's a kid. Do you think your same-age son would have handled this situation like a politically-minded adult? Of course not. The American Indian got in his face. Those of you calling this kid "entitled," a "jerk," a "bully" are really inappropriate.

I don't have a son so I don't have skin in this game aside from being a fair-minded mom, who sees that this kid was unfairly singled out, by getting placed in a charged political situation by a lot of politically motivated grown ass adults. That includes the media, who sought to destroy this kid. How would you feel if the media turned your child into a target for a moment's pleasure? You'd be outraged. But you are not outraged on this kid's behalf, are you, because it doesn't fit your political agenda.

You really do want to turn American men into wimps, don't you? This kid acted the way a well mannered but red blooded kid would have reacted. He did nothing wrong. Get over yourselves.

No one wants to go viral. But when it happens, then you roll with it. You don't sue everyone for millions of dollars. That's poor parenting.

You sue if you’ve been defamed, especially if the media outlet intentionally edited the clip to further its defamatory angle to boost clicks and drive revenue.

+1
Yep. No question the media was deliberately trying to sell a fictional narrative. You bet I would have sued if that was my child and he had done nothing wrong.

Nothing wrong? There's nothing wrong with going to some town far from your own home, then proceeding to make fun of and laugh at some stranger, followed up by going over to him with a whole gang of your friends, getting in his face, sneering at him and not letting him walk by? What kind of manners are you people teaching your kids?

In what universe did any of the above garbage happen? The only person who approached anyone at all, was Nathan Phillips as he deliberately got right up in the face of Sandmann. Phillips could have walked on by at any point, but chose not to. That would have wasted a great photo op, you know.

Sandmann and his friends were blocking his path. Sandmann even admitted it.

Where - exactly - is a quote from Sandmann stating that he and his friends were blocking the path of Phillips? Because here's what he actually said:

You also forgot this part which was pretty much the clincher.

And yet, he never claims to have blocked Phillips path. He simply said he could see how Phillips might perceive it that way, but in reality, Phillips had plenty of room to move around Sandmann. He chose not to. Gee, I wonder why.

SO… if he himself thinks Phillips might have perceived it that way, it’s easy to see how a member of the media might have perceived it that way, too, therefore, zero defamation. Thanks for playing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Lin Wood had his license to practice law suspended for mental health issues.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2021/06/10/pro-trump-lawyer-lin-wood-loses-lawsuit-over-mental-health-evaluation/?sh=51764e065137

Wood was on the case years ago at the start of the thread, he probably hasn’t been for a while.

I’m pp. Thanks. Another poster had mentioned Lin Wood and I had forgotten he was no longer on the case. Right wing media seems to think the dismissal is proof Sandman was paid zillions out of court. Wouldn’t it be summary judgement if they had settled? I’m aware that CNN settled earlier. I still wonder what kind of parents send their teens on sleep away trips halfway across the country with priests. I hope non of these teens were victimized.

DC is "halfway across the country" from Kentucky? Huh! Who knew? Tell us you know nothing about geography without telling us you know nothing about geography.

Whosh. Misses the point. Who lets their teen aged son over night with priests?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if that had been your teen-aged son encountering these grown ass men behaving badly? Would you have expected your son to handle the situation better than this kid did - so that anyone filming the encounter would have said his behavior was perfect? He's a kid. Do you think your same-age son would have handled this situation like a politically-minded adult? Of course not. The American Indian got in his face. Those of you calling this kid "entitled," a "jerk," a "bully" are really inappropriate.

I don't have a son so I don't have skin in this game aside from being a fair-minded mom, who sees that this kid was unfairly singled out, by getting placed in a charged political situation by a lot of politically motivated grown ass adults. That includes the media, who sought to destroy this kid. How would you feel if the media turned your child into a target for a moment's pleasure? You'd be outraged. But you are not outraged on this kid's behalf, are you, because it doesn't fit your political agenda.

You really do want to turn American men into wimps, don't you? This kid acted the way a well mannered but red blooded kid would have reacted. He did nothing wrong. Get over yourselves.

No one wants to go viral. But when it happens, then you roll with it. You don't sue everyone for millions of dollars. That's poor parenting.

You sue if you’ve been defamed, especially if the media outlet intentionally edited the clip to further its defamatory angle to boost clicks and drive revenue.

+1
Yep. No question the media was deliberately trying to sell a fictional narrative. You bet I would have sued if that was my child and he had done nothing wrong.

Nothing wrong? There's nothing wrong with going to some town far from your own home, then proceeding to make fun of and laugh at some stranger, followed up by going over to him with a whole gang of your friends, getting in his face, sneering at him and not letting him walk by? What kind of manners are you people teaching your kids?

In what universe did any of the above garbage happen? The only person who approached anyone at all, was Nathan Phillips as he deliberately got right up in the face of Sandmann. Phillips could have walked on by at any point, but chose not to. That would have wasted a great photo op, you know.

Sandmann and his friends were blocking his path. Sandmann even admitted it.

Where - exactly - is a quote from Sandmann stating that he and his friends were blocking the path of Phillips? Because here's what he actually said:

You also forgot this part which was pretty much the clincher.

And yet, he never claims to have blocked Phillips path. He simply said he could see how Phillips might perceive it that way, but in reality, Phillips had plenty of room to move around Sandmann. He chose not to. Gee, I wonder why.

SO… if he himself thinks Phillips might have perceived it that way, it’s easy to see how a member of the media might have perceived it that way, too, therefore, zero defamation. Thanks for playing.

This really is the end of the matter.

If you act in a manner that paints you in a negative light, and YOU admit others may have thought that, there is zero defamation.

Enjoy your legal bills, kid (unless some rich MAGA bailed you out).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Lin Wood had his license to practice law suspended for mental health issues.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2021/06/10/pro-trump-lawyer-lin-wood-loses-lawsuit-over-mental-health-evaluation/?sh=51764e065137

Wood was on the case years ago at the start of the thread, he probably hasn’t been for a while.

I’m pp. Thanks. Another poster had mentioned Lin Wood and I had forgotten he was no longer on the case. Right wing media seems to think the dismissal is proof Sandman was paid zillions out of court. Wouldn’t it be summary judgement if they had settled? I’m aware that CNN settled earlier. I still wonder what kind of parents send their teens on sleep away trips halfway across the country with priests. I hope non of these teens were victimized.

I think CNN is the only one that settled. The Post was dismissed earlier and all of these other ones he lost at the summary judgment stage.
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/former-covington-catholic-student-nick-sandmann-loses-defamation-lawsuits-against-cbs-abc-nyt-and-others/

And it was settled for a pittance. The fact that CNN didn't even have to give a public apology or acknowledgement of wrongdoing is central to illustrating how meager it was.

Face it, there was no "there" there in going after the media on this.

Can you provide a link re settlement amount?

[Anonymous]

There is so much ignorance posted on this thread. The lawsuit failed, mostly. Oh well. Read the constitution before posting would y'all. Interesting document.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is so much ignorance posted on this thread. The lawsuit failed, mostly. Oh well. Read the constitution before posting would y'all. Interesting document.

The irony of someone who actually writes out "y'all" and then lectures others on ignorance. Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is so much ignorance posted on this thread. The lawsuit failed, mostly. Oh well. Read the constitution before posting would y'all. Interesting document.

The irony of someone who actually writes out "y'all" and then lectures others on ignorance. Wow.

Nick Sandmann probably talks like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is so much ignorance posted on this thread. The lawsuit failed, mostly. Oh well. Read the constitution before posting would y'all. Interesting document.

The irony of someone who actually writes out "y'all" and then lectures others on ignorance. Wow.

Brits use y’all all the time. And your elitism is showing. Let me guess…lawyer? Fed worker?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is so much ignorance posted on this thread. The lawsuit failed, mostly. Oh well. Read the constitution before posting would y'all. Interesting document.

The irony of someone who actually writes out "y'all" and then lectures others on ignorance. Wow.

Brits use y’all all the time. And your elitism is showing. Let me guess…lawyer? Fed worker?

Probably whackos who demand that everyone goose step in formation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is so much ignorance posted on this thread. The lawsuit failed, mostly. Oh well. Read the constitution before posting would y'all. Interesting document.

The irony of someone who actually writes out "y'all" and then lectures others on ignorance. Wow.

Nick Sandmann probably talks like that.

Saying it is not the same thing as deliberately writing it out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Lin Wood had his license to practice law suspended for mental health issues.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2021/06/10/pro-trump-lawyer-lin-wood-loses-lawsuit-over-mental-health-evaluation/?sh=51764e065137

Wood was on the case years ago at the start of the thread, he probably hasn’t been for a while.

I’m pp. Thanks. Another poster had mentioned Lin Wood and I had forgotten he was no longer on the case. Right wing media seems to think the dismissal is proof Sandman was paid zillions out of court. Wouldn’t it be summary judgement if they had settled? I’m aware that CNN settled earlier. I still wonder what kind of parents send their teens on sleep away trips halfway across the country with priests. I hope non of these teens were victimized.

I think CNN is the only one that settled. The Post was dismissed earlier and all of these other ones he lost at the summary judgment stage.
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/former-covington-catholic-student-nick-sandmann-loses-defamation-lawsuits-against-cbs-abc-nyt-and-others/

And it was settled for a pittance. The fact that CNN didn't even have to give a public apology or acknowledgement of wrongdoing is central to illustrating how meager it was.

Face it, there was no "there" there in going after the media on this.

Can you provide a link re settlement amount?

Can you provide a link re settlement that he got anything with seven digits or more? Pretty much every attorney and legal expert I've heard or talked to agrees Sandmann just got a nuisance settlement from CNN to make the case go away. The fact that CNN didn't have to apologize or admit any wrongdoing says it all. The fact that he couldn't even get a nuisance settlement out of anyone other than CNN says it all. The fact that Lin Wood, his attorney for the CNN case is dead broke says it all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is so much ignorance posted on this thread. The lawsuit failed, mostly. Oh well. Read the constitution before posting would y'all. Interesting document.

The irony of someone who actually writes out "y'all" and then lectures others on ignorance. Wow.

DP - I saw the PP's use of "y'all" as mocking and satirical and it flew right over your head. You actually proved PP's point by complaining about it.