George Zimmerman sues Buttplug, Elizabeth Warren over Trayvon Martin birthday tweets

[spurraider21]

Legally, he has a decent case for damages. Obviously not as much as he is asking, but some. He was tried and found not guilty by a jury. Explicitly insinuating he is a white supremacist and racist is clearly defamatory.

he doesnt even remotely have a case. what's the defamatory comment? that he's a white supremacist and racist? truth is always a defense to defamation. and he'd have to prove that they had a "reckless disregard for the truth."

he was acquitted of murder. he wasnt acquitted of being a white supremacist or racist, and there's ample evidence to support that he's racist. none of the tweets reference him by name or claim that he was guilty of murder. there really isnt a case here.

OJ wouldnt win a defamation case either if somebody tweeted about him killing his wife

zimmerman is clearly a public figure, and he's had other cases tossed for just that reason

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2014...5181404142738/

[spurraider21]

there's no need to defend zimmerman tbh ... he's a low life and a complete piece of .

this is coming from somebody who during the trial said that he should probably be acquitted because i didnt think the evidence went "beyond a reasonable doubt" even though i personally thought and still think he was guilty

[Will Hunting]

he doesnt even remotely have a case. what's the defamatory comment? that he's a white supremacist and racist? truth is always a defense to defamation. and he'd have to prove that they had a "reckless disregard for the truth."

he was acquitted of murder. he wasnt acquitted of being a white supremacist or racist, and there's ample evidence to support that he's racist. none of the tweets reference him by name or claim that he was guilty of murder. there really isnt a case here.

OJ wouldnt win a defamation case either if somebody tweeted about him killing his wife

Pretty much this. Not only does he not have a claim but in a state like Texas with an aggressive anti-SLAPP law he’d be liable for the other sides attorneys fees and might even get sanctioned beyond that (not that it matters since he can’t pay).

It’d be prettt hard to win a defamation claim for someone calling you a “racist” no matter who you are. It’s such a highly subjective term and there’s no way to assess the truthfulness of “X person is racist” in a black and white manner.

The thing people also don’t get is even if CC was right you need to be able to show damages. There is nothing about Warren or Buttigeig’s tweets that he would be able to say proximately damaged him. He’s a broke unemployed head who can’t get a job with his extensive criminal record who no one other than the alt right likes. None of that changed after the tweets.

[spurraider21]

Pretty much this. Not only does he not have a claim but in a state like Texas with an aggressive anti-SLAPP law he’d be liable for the other sides attorneys fees and might even get sanctioned beyond that (not that it matters since he can’t pay).

It’d be prettt hard to win a defamation claim for someone calling you a “racist” no matter who you are. It’s such a highly subjective term and there’s no way to assess the truthfulness of “X person is racist” in a black and white manner.

The thing people also don’t get is even if CC was right you need to be able to show damages. There is nothing about Warren or Buttigeig’s tweets that he would be able to say proximately damaged him. He’s a broke unemployed head who can’t get a job with his extensive criminal record who no one other than the alt right likes. None of that changed after the tweets.

yeah, proving damages is a big part of defamation suits, but i wouldnt even go that far because there's virtually no chance that he can establish liability since there's no "actual malice" or "reckless disregard of the truth"... and most importantly, truth is always a defense to defamation

[Will Hunting]

yeah, proving damages is a big part of defamation suits, but i wouldnt even go that far because there's virtually no chance that he can establish liability since there's no "actual malice" or "reckless disregard of the truth"... and most importantly, truth is always a defense to defamation

I was just pointing out that step 10 is a non starter even if you ignore the fact he has no prayer at getting past steps 1-9.

[boutons_deux]

George Zimmerman’s lawyer charged with pressuring rape victim to change her story

arrested on witness tampering charges in a child rape case.

Hal Uhrig was charged with solicitation to commit perjury after allegedly

setting up a meeting between his client, the victim and her father and

asking the victim and her father to write a letter to the state attorney recanting the rape allegations,

https://www.rawstory.com/hal-uhrig