Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Scoutmaster

You are wasting your breath hyperventilating over the “public figure” question.

As I pointed out, the viability of her claim is problematic because

1. It is quite unlikely that she would sue for being called a “slut” because that would open up the factual question as to whether and to what extent she is what might be considered promiscuous.

2. As to having falsely attributed to her the claim that she herself took birth control pills and paid for them, she doesn’t have a sound basis on which to argue reputational harm, which is a necessary element of a defamation claim in these circumstances.

Did you even read my post to you? I made these points to you before.


140 posted on 03/05/2012 3:53:45 PM PST by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies ]


To: Meet the New Boss
Did you even read my post to you? I made these points to you before.

Yes. I read them. I apologize if I didn't adequately point out why I didn't agree with them the first time around.

It is quite unlikely that she would sue for being called a “slut” because that would open up the factual question as to whether and to what extent she is what might be considered promiscuous.

"Slut" isn't the only issue, although 'slut' is defamation per se in many jusidctions. Fluke wouldn't have to prove damages. They are presume in a per se defamation. In fact, 'slut' isn't remotely the primary issue. Limbaugh attributed dozens of specific statements about Fluke's sex life to Fluke. None of them were true. Limbaugh said Fluke was "immoral, baseless". He said she was a prostitute. Prostitution's a crime. That's defamation per se. Again, you don't have to prove damages. Rush made statements over and over, such as Fluke claiming she was "having so much sex, it's amazing she can still walk." Have you reviewed the per se rules for defamation regarding sexual debasement? Everything Limbaugh attributed to Fluke's mouth that she didn't say, and that was derogatory, is subject to a defamation claim. Not just the fact that Limbaugh said she was a 'slut'.

As to having falsely attributed to her the claim that she herself took birth control pills and paid for them, she doesn’t have a sound basis on which to argue reputational [sic] harm, which is a necessary element of a defamation claim in these circumstances.

I don't think you're familiar with all of the things Limbaugh said about this woman. Was the "I'm supposed to have sex with three guys tonight" comment about her? Talking about her buying condoms in the sixth grade? I believe you're being delusional if you think all that's involved is whether he said she took birth control pills.

142 posted on 03/05/2012 4:18:40 PM PST by Scoutmaster (You knew the job was dangerous when you took it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson