Posted on 02/25/2022 7:53:12 AM PST by Kaslin
On Monday’sTucker Carlson Tonight, Kyle Rittenhouse unveiled The Media Accountability Project, a new group dedicated to creating consequences for those who spread defamatory lies about the young man acquitted of murder charges last fall. Rittenhouse said that he and his attorneys plan to sue a host of politicians, journalists, and celebrities for their dishonest attacks on his character.
A jury of Rittenhouse’s peers on November 19 found him innocent by way of self-defense in three shootings, two fatal, during Left-wing race riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Since then, many have lied about Rittenhouse and the deadly incident in which he was involved. News anchors and Democrat politicians called him a murderer, a white supremacist, a terrorist, and falsely accused him of assorted barbarities. To many who have avoided defamation, this case is a no brainer: “Sue the living pants off these liars. It’s a cut-and-dried case!”
Sadly, it’s not that simple. Defamation actions are among the hardest lawsuits to win, and they are laden with caveats. As someone who has been defamed and lied about by numerous Left-wing organizations, politicians, and media personalities, I learned this the hard way. To be clear, the defamation that Rittenhouse endured was lightyears worse than what I faced. The lies spread about him also generated much more terrifying consequences.
I have written extensively about my circumstances here and here. After the initial attacks against me proved baseless, I totally was exonerated of any wrongdoing.
Even so, that did not prevent the reputational damage that the Left’s lies inflicted on me. ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel used my name and image on air. He said that my perfectly lawful promotion of GOP ballot-collection boxes was illegal. Kimmel incited violence against me when he said that I should be stuffed inside such a container. Kimmel added: “Make no mistake about it, these people will stop at nothing to steal your vote.” No surprise, the hate and death threats against me increased after this incident.
John Iadarola and Francesca Fiorentini spent much of an October 2020 episode of The Damage Report on YouTube defaming me as a criminal and demanding my imprisonment.
One episode of YouTube’s Roland Martin Unfiltered opened with my name and face. He accused me of election fraud.
Maddening examples of such slander and defamation against me abound. Thankfully, exculpatory facts soon emerged:
Even so, that did not prevent the reputational damage that the Left’s lies inflicted on me. ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel used my name and image on air. He said that my perfectly lawful promotion of GOP ballot-collection boxes was illegal. Kimmel incited violence against me when he said that I should be stuffed inside such a container. Kimmel added: “Make no mistake about it, these people will stop at nothing to steal your vote.” No surprise, the hate and death threats against me increased after this incident.
John Iadarola and Francesca Fiorentini spent much of an October 2020 episode of The Damage Report on YouTube defaming me as a criminal and demanding my imprisonment.
One episode of YouTube’s Roland Martin Unfiltered opened with my name and face. He accused me of election fraud.
Maddening examples of such slander and defamation against me abound. Thankfully, exculpatory facts soon emerged:
Once the truth was out, I was completely vindicated. The media’s sinister statements against me indisputably were lies.
My friends and loved ones urged me to lawyer up and sue for defamation. I was poised to strike back. I retained seasoned and talented attorneys. I was extremely confident that I would reap justice as those who lied about me endured the reckoning that they deserved.
It wasn’t so simple.
There are many facets to defamation. When someone spreads a falsehood that damages one’s reputation, that is actionable. But there are ample hurdles to leap once litigation begins.
Many declarations, even blatant lies, can be considered opinions. Even in a close call, a court could decide that a blatant lie, spewed with malice, is merely an opinion. Jimmy Kimmel stood before millions of TV viewers, broadcast misinformation about, and incited violence against me -- a virtual no name. Nonetheless, Kimmel could be tough to sue because he can hide behind the fact that he’s a comedian. Never mind that his monologue’s harsh tone and statements were not expressed in a joking manner.
As I repeatedly learned, defamation defendants often deploy a legal doctrine called “anti-slapp.” In short, if you sue for defamation and lose, you must pay the accused defamer’s legal bills.
Sandmann sued CNN, NBC News, and the Washington Post for their pure fabrications that he was a teen racist who physically blocked Phillips. All three media giants settled out of court for undisclosed sums. While Sandmann’s suit against CNN demanded $275 million, he most likely collected far less. Some legal experts have speculated to me that he collected as little as $35,000. Defamation victories are rare, often small, and far less excruciating than plaintiffs would like. Such a dissatisfying fate might await Rittenhouse.
I hope I am wrong. Rittenhouse deserves millions for the torture that he suffered at the hands of the villainous liberal media. Those who defamed him owe him justice and deserve financial pain. Wanting this and achieving it can be two different things, thanks to the relevant legal rules and practices.
Winning defamation suits is difficult, in part, to protect free speech. Making it tough for powerful politicians, dominant corporations, and wealthy individuals to succeed in defamation litigation is supposed to shield journalists from those who would love to unplug them and their unflattering coverage. But in a perverse sense of justice, these elites scurry behind these legal conventions as they spew lies about unknown everyday people without media millions to defend themselves.
Plenty about defamation law demands change -- too much for one op-ed. Lawmakers and courts should consider serious reforms: The ability to sue and collect for defamation should be easier for those without the media presence to defend themselves. Unlike Biden and CNN, Rittenhouse and Sandman lack the megaphones to fight back. I likewise had no megaphone to defend myself against Jimmy Kimmel and ABC.
Left or Right, Americans should agree that journalism’s twin engines should be truth and integrity. If news organizations suffered severe financial consequences for spreading lies about obscure people, they actually might report fairly and honestly. The media could serve America and the world far better by telling the truth.
I wonder if Trump can get in on this and sue as well. My God, the amount of times that man has been slandered, defamed, libeled is just utterly through the roof. I seem to recall him saying that when he left office he would sue but I don’t know.
So somehow 'new' law is going to be ENFORCED better than OLD law??
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.