Posted on 12/23/2021 9:49:55 AM PST by Conservat1
That’s the thing I love about FR.
I can vent all my ill-considered and amateur opinions about law, sport, science, politics - all anonymously.
And you all have to read them!
Nick Sandmann’s lawyer Robert Barnes explained how weak Kyle’s defamation case was.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Must not have been too weak, NBC settled with him.
Because he was found not guilty he can claim that the media was responsible for trying to ruin an innocent person.
I take it you didn't listen to the video clip I posted in 12 above by Nick Sandmann's own lawyer, Robert Barnes, where he explains why Kyle Rittenhouse's case is not the same as Nick Sandmann's? Barnes says that Kyle's mother has a better case for defamation than Kyle does.
If he has a good case he doesn't need financial baking. Lawyers will take the case on contingency.
NBC settled with SANDMANN, not RITTENHOUSE.
As long as the media hung an 'alleged' in front of his name then they protected themselves. They can just claim they were reporting on the case.
When did this happen?
Are you sure it was Rittenhouse and not Sandmann
I don’t know what the laws are, regarding the opinionated news talking heads, who expressed opinions that he was guilty, that he was a white supremacist, etc.
I’m sure they can justify the news reporting on the case as not being libel or slander. I bet any lawsuits, if any, will be targeted towards the liberal loudmouth talking heads on MSNBC and CNN, who were expressing opinions.
Probably but I do recall many in the media, specifically calling him a white supremacist and and racist. As far as I know there was never any fact or even good tips in those directions, and it is easy to present recent data showing peoples careers ruined when tagged with those accusations. So I think slander could be justified. I am not sure he will ever get back to a “normal” life.
For such a weak ass case as presented by the prosecutors, I think he could sue the city for false imprisonment.
Depends on who you talk to. During the criminal trial the prosecution wanted to introduce evidence connecting Rittenhouse with the Proud Boys and other alleged white supremacist organizations and the judge denied it. That evidence will be available to the defendants in any civil suit.
For such a weak ass case as presented by the prosecutors, I think he could sue the city for false imprisonment.
No, he doesn't. He would have to prove that the prosecution knew he was innocent when they arrested him.
“
You would have thought that after Sandmann took the MSM news orgs to the cleaners they’d learn...”
Libs are always off to the next case...
PoeToaster: “He made himself obsolete as soon as he defended BLM. Nobody is scrambling to do anything. Fart in the wind.”
____
I hope he meant ‘Black lives’ as in real lives, not BLM fringe group as an organization
John Zeig Heilmann needs to sued.
“As long as the media hung an ‘alleged’ in front of his name then they protected themselves. They can just claim they were reporting on the case.”
They didn’t Han ‘alledged’ with ‘white supremist that crossed state lines with a gun’.
“And you all have to read them!”
I, for one, never read your posts!
If that's what he's suing over then it could get interesting.
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.