Replies

If anything happens to the Casebolt family sue those encouraging the crimes and therefore responsible and let the law handle the ones doing the violent acts.

And I would sue the employees of the MSM as well as the Obama-Holder demagogues and the race-grievance industry -- they may not have "put a price on the head of the family" like the jerk mentioned in the article but they do willingly stoke the flames of hatred and revenge.

The doctrine of vicarious liability.

It's worked against white supremacist groups for influencing others (not members of the hate group) to murder minorities.

Traditional principles of vicarious liability include

aiding and abetting and
civil conspiracy.

Though associated with criminal law, these theories can be used to attribute fault to persons not directly related to an act that harmed a victim.

It must be proved that the others 'provided substantial assistance or encouragement' to those who did harm the victim.

In the SPLC suit against Tom Metzger and WAR the skinheads were not members of Metzger's WAR. But Metzger's rantings had influence over the mindless skinheads due to his reputation in the white supremacy movement

the argument for liability becomes strong because
the one with the influence knows that the actor will probably act on his advice.

The aiding and abetting theory fits because

it depicts two or more independent actors,
at least one of whom encouraged the other(s) to act.

Lawyers can invoke the aiding and abetting theory with relative ease. Invoking the aiding and abetting assumes two independent actors.

To prove an aiding and abetting claim

the defendant must have provided the actor with substantial assistance or encouragement
expecting that the actor will commit violence;
the encouragement must have been largely responsible for causing the violent conduct;
the crime must also have been a foreseeable result of the assistance.

This is a kind of an outline of information available on the Internet.