Posted on 04/10/2019 8:48:46 AM PDT by detective
The Washington Post has moved to dismiss a defamation lawsuit brought by Kentucky teenager Nicholas Sandmann, who on Jan. 18 quickly found himself the talk of social media when a group of students at Covington Catholic High School came face-to-face with Native American activists at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial.
When observers saw a video clip of the confrontation, some focused on Sandmann, wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat and sporting a seemingly smug grin while watching Native American elder Nathan Phillips. In one of its first stories about the incident, The Washington Post quoted Phillips as saying he felt "threatened by the teens," that they "swarmed around him" and one of them "blocked my way and wouldn't allow me to retreat."
(Excerpt) Read more at hollywoodreporter.com ...
They say their coverage was "not only accurate; it was ultimately favorable to him."
"In short, the articles at issue may not have been flattering of the Covington Catholic students, but they do not give rise to a defamation claim by Sandmann," continues the dismissal motion. "Indeed, the Post’s overall coverage — including the articles that the Complaint fails to mention — was not only accurate; it was ultimately favorable to him."
To be expected. They will pay; in the end a Kentucky jury will see to that.
“”In short, the articles at issue may not have been flattering of the Covington Catholic students, but they do not give rise to a defamation claim by Sandmann,” continues the dismissal motion. “Indeed, the Post’s overall coverage — including the articles that the Complaint fails to mention — was not only accurate; it was ultimately favorable to him.” “
The Post can say that the reporter reported inaccurately. They will issue a retraction and suspend the reporter for a month with pay.
There you have it! Sandmann is GUILTY of racist behavior and inciting a riot.
Black is white, up is down . . .
Obviously printing knowingly false and defamatory information about a Teenage Boy who ends up receiving Death Threats while harming his future prospects is okie dokie.
I did not know that.
Everything is OK as long as it advances the narrative.
sporting a seemingly smug grin
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
If that’s the case then this kids needs to be sent to a re-education camp. NO SEEMINGLY SMUG GRINS FOR YOU!!!!!!!!!!
Filing to dismiss is merely procedural in any defense of a lawsuit. The only purpose this article serves is to bolster the nitwit dems and make nervous the conservatives that have never been in a lawsuit or know how they work.
Why?
DC judge...DC jury.
But that's not to say he won't get *anything*.
“Filing to dismiss is merely procedural in any defense of a lawsuit. The only purpose this article serves is to bolster the nitwit dems and make nervous the conservatives that have never been in a lawsuit or know how they work.”
I know that.
The article is important because it shows clearly what the Washington Post is saying about their coverage of the Covington students.
Kentucky judge and jury. Subhead of the article: “The paper tells a Kentucky judge that “politics has nothing to do with this case” and that its coverage of a Jan. 18 incident was “ultimately favorable” to Nicholas Sandmann.”
“Ten bucks says that the kid doesn’t get a nickel from the Amazon Post.
Why?
DC judge...DC jury.
But that’s not to say he won’t get *anything*.”
The suit was filed and is being heard in the United States District Court Eastern District of Kentucky.
Ooops, a Kentucky federal judge” so it is a toss-up. Here is the original complaint - https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5810689-Sandmann-Complaint.html
I thought this happened in DC...
Good thing the suit was filed in Kentucky.
A jury of DC apparatchiks would surely free their beloved Post from all responsibility.
The lawyers of the Washington Post made a feeble attempt to say there was nothing wrong in saying the Nicholas Sandmann blocked Nathan Phillips even though there the video of that incident went viral. Standing still is not the same as blocking someone.
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.