Posted on 08/09/2016 4:25:21 PM PDT by ColdOne
A looming First Amendment showdown drew closer Tuesday as a federal judge ordered conservative media host Glenn Beck to identify at least two confidential sources in connection with a defamation lawsuit stemming from Beck's reporting on the Boston Marathon bombing.
The suit was filed by Saudi Arabian student Abdulrahman Alharbi, who was injured at the scene of the deadly bombings. Beck continued to link the Saudi national to the attacks even after U.S. officials said publicly he'd been cleared.
U.S. District Court Judge Patti Saris ruled that Beck must disclose the names of two Department of Homeland Security employees who allegedly gave a Beck producer information backing up the radio and TV host's claim that Alharbi was the "money man" behind the attack.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Pretty sure that one of the sources was Cigarette Smoking Man and the other was probably that bad dude from Person of Interest.
And Beck is not a journalist
He is going to lose
Depends on the judge. It's a battle of wills. Lock him up, he has the keys to his jail. I forget her name, reporter in the Libby case went to jail protecting sources. It's a badge of honor among journalists.
And yes, I accept that Beck is not a journalist. I think shield laws are a bad thing anyway. The press holds itself out as some sort of paragon of truth, when it is a fountain of falsehood. I'd burn a few of 'em at the stake.
We need to take a pill here who everyone hopes wins this...the Saudi or Beck.
Can they both lose?
You mean that the guy’s last name means “the warrior” is not enough?
Nifster said, “”On defamation suits involving private parties one shows damage just by the propagation of a lie.”
Cboldt. is this true? Does it have to be a lie directly about someone, or can it be a lie that is then used to defame someone else? What is the standard for proving that somebody’s lie damaged you enough to give you legal standing?
Applying the previous link to this case (and not talking about Beck's refusal to give fact evidence, which is a defense he is raising - if his statement is true, there cannot be defamation), claiming that somebody PAID for bombing that was actually carried out, when that person has been cleared by the law, is going to be per se defamatory.
See Richard Jewell case (Atlanta Olympics bombing). Some allegations are so bad (he's a pervert, he's a bigot, he paid for a terrorist act), that there is no need to prove damages.
JUdith Miller. She finally submitted
The judge has a much more draconian measure that can be invoked. If Beck refuses then the judge needs to merely give a default judgement to the plaintiff.....end of story
Beck did this to himself. It’s called natural consequences
The plaintiff in this case is the young man Beck accused of being involved in the bombing
The purpose of shield laws is to protect journalists who make up stories.
The remedy here should be to strike all pleadings and testimony where Beck claims that he based his story on what unnamed cops told him. He can still raise truth as an absolute defense to the defamation claim, and prove it as best he can.
Heh - maybe he can tell the Judge - “Read about it in my new book.”
I never heard of this case until now. I looked up the Saudi in question - Abdulrahman Alharbi. I could be wrong, but if that guy is not the son of a man I knew (named Abdullah Al-harbi) in the very late 80s and early 90s when he was an exchange student, then I am blind. They look so similar that its stunning. The age of the younger man fits too because the older Al-harbi had a 16 year old fiance in SA in 1990/1991. She would have turned 18 one year before of in the year of the Alharbi’s birth. The Al-harbi I knew became very anti-American while studying here because we were “occupying” his country. When I pointed out we were there by invitation to thwart a possible invasion by Saddam Hussein, he just said we were there for Israel’s sake and that Israel was the 51st state. His father was a Lt. Col. in the SA army. His uncle a general.
Beck enters plea of Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity.
Is it bad that I’m kind of rooting for the Saudi?
“Is it bad that I’m kind of rooting for the Saudi?
..a guilty pleasure shared by many..
Could mental illness be employed as a defense?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.