Posted on 06/19/2014 8:35:35 AM PDT by GIdget2004
can he sue the judge as well?????
That was an honest mistake.
If you’re White, or called White, you’re automatically wrong, and you have no recourse.
Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles could see that one coming.
The attorneys he has in this case are not schlubs —
They will ask for her removal before she has to do any more homework.
Maybe those people will be able to sue NBC.
What was “wrong” with the one she dismissed?
cannot prove???
Isn't that what a trial and discovery and cross-examinations are for???
I don’t know but the fact that she has tipped her hand on the other three without doing her homework on them should be all his attorneys need.
And Helen Keller could have heard it coming!
NBC is represented by several lawyers, including those with the Tampa law firm Thomas and LoCicero, the same firm that represents the Orlando Sentinel.
Thanks. I wonder who edited the 911 tape to make him look racist, I think that was MSNBC.
Nope, you would think MSNBC, but it was NBC proper. Which is what makes this all the more infuriating.
Has anyone posted which president appointed this ‘judge’?
The issue here is that NBC can claim they didn’t use actual malice against Zimmerman and weasel their way out of the suit. The issue is that they have actual malice against every gun owner in the United States of America, which is why they used Zimmerman as an agenda-advancing pawn.
Ahhh...
Fair and Balanced, anyone?
You’d think.
Heh. The legal standard is "actual malice" which has nothing to do with malice, in fact. The term of art "actual malice" exists when the publisher puts out something it knew or should have known was false. I'd say doctoring a tape satisfies that, easily. The question then is whether or not the doctoring creates a bad image of the person presented. I'd say that is easily met in this case, too.
Nelson has been overturned on appeal before, not that she cares. The lawyer in the defamation case isn't the same lawyer who took the defense side of the murder rap.
At the request for summary judgment, there is a possibility that there is no evidence to support the claim. Here, the actual mindset of the publisher is completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the misleading report was done out of love. It does matter if it was done out of ignorance, but doctoring a recording can't be done with ignorance of what the original and edited recordings contain. They knew exactly what they had done.
"Misgivings" doesn't matter either. It's just knowing or "should have known" (not relevant in this case) that what they published was misleading as to Zimmerman's character.
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.