Judge rules in favor of NBC in George Zimmerman's defamation lawsuit [Same judge as trial]

NBC ORLANDO ^ | 6/30/14

[MHGinTN]

Misprision?

[Robert DeLong]

•Appointed Circuit Judge 18th Judicial Circuit of Florida, by Governor Jeb Bush May 1999.
•Elected Circuit Judge 18th Judicial Circuit of Florida, September 2000 with 72% approval rate of the voters in Seminole and Brevard Counties

See JUDICIAL HISTORY

[GOPJ]

Facts trump feelings. Thanks for sharing Robert.

[DisorderOnBorder]

Nelson appointed by Jeb Bush...so, almost appt. by a Dem

[SeaHawkFan]

Zimmerman was not a public figure just because NBC thrust him into the news. If that were the case, no plaintiffs could ever prevail in a defamation action against the media.

[Uncle Chip]

YEP —

[nathanbedford]

Of course, other media outlets participated in making Zimmerman a public figure. But the making of Zimmerman a public figure was entirely involuntary on his part. NBC was a leading media outlet in making him a public figure and they were doing so as a profit-making venture.

To say as you do:

Zimmerman was not a public figure just because NBC thrust him into the news. If that were the case, no plaintiffs could ever prevail in a defamation action against the media.

ignores the principle that a wrongdoer should not be permitted to profit from his wrongdoing or to hold his wrongdoing up as a barrier to justice. It is analogous to the IRS saying you have no proof because we destroyed the e-mails.

If we permit the national media to libel someone whom they have made a national figure, because he is a national figure, we have opened the door to tyranny by a select group because we have granted them immunity. I do not think that justice requires that they be the sole efficient producing cause of the claimant being a public figure for them to have forfeited that protection.

The purpose of the doctrine coming from New York Times vs. Sullivan is to prevent robust public debate from being chilled by fears of libel actions especially when it occurs among public figures. There is no such justification in this case. The libel itself contributes to making the man a public figure and to disqualify him because he is made prominent in the news by the very libel complained of does not advance the free exchange of ideas on public issues.

Rather the public purpose of personal privacy and reputation are preserved and the need for powerful media organizations to refrain from libelous broadcasts is a value that needs to be advanced. The relative power of a giant media outlet compared to the relative impotence of the private person as a victim of libel requires a different standard than that which was set down in New York Times vs. Sullivan. The great debate on public issues by public personalities will go on being aired.

[GeronL]

same judge?

seriously?

[maine-iac7]

I pray he gets a bit of justice one day - enough to fund a new life - they ruined his old one.

[sarasmom]

Why yes, yes indeed.

Personally, I don't much like Zimmerman.He is a Democrat.
But I am quite able to separate my distaste for him as a liberal democrat and judge him solely by the facts of the case(s) under the law.

NBC knowingly and falsely libeled him, and caused great harm to him.

This judge just heaped additional harm upon him, for political reasons, and ruled against the law.

She should be added to the suit against those who harmed him.
I don't have to like him to know he has been egregiously wronged by both the media and the judicial process.
I wouldn't expect any liberal to understand that position.
I would expect every conservative to comprehend that.

[GeronL]

I agree. I cannot believe this was in front of the same judge.