Sandmann Case Against WaPo Settled

[-Astoria-]

And drink.

Are you trying to suggest that "someone else started it" isn't actually an excuse for racist bullshit?

?

[Gravlen]

Yeah, I don't know. I kind of remember the incident and the smugly smiling photo but after that, the news cycle is brutal and it faded.

Something to keep in mind, people.

The suit was SETTLED.

He didn't WIN, nor do we know how much money he got in the settlement.

My guess is, the WaPo gave him the money to make this go away, not because he had a point. Someone said he got 50 million? When 90% of the claims were dropped because they were bullshit?

I don't buy it. $1 million, tops. Jeff Bezos might have money to burn and he might be a corporatist dirtbag but I doubt he's going to surrender $50 million when that money could go to worthier things like several trips to space or exposing this kid as a furry.

This is accurate. A settlement might not even mean that he got a dime, considering that his claims were originally dismissed. It might have been tactically wise to attempt to limit the losses incurred.

[Vassenor]

Something to keep in mind, people.

The suit was SETTLED.

He didn't WIN, nor do we know how much money he got in the settlement.

My guess is, the WaPo gave him the money to make this go away, not because he had a point. Someone said he got 50 million? When 90% of the claims were dropped because they were bullshit?

I don't buy it. $1 million, tops. Jeff Bezos might have money to burn and he might be a corporatist dirtbag but I doubt he's going to surrender $50 million when that money could go to worthier things like several trips to space or exposing this kid as a furry.

This is accurate. A settlement might not even mean that he got a dime, considering that his claims were originally dismissed. It might have been tactically wise to attempt to limit the losses incurred.

Problem is some people are just that desperate for a win against the paper.

[Gormwood]

This is accurate. A settlement might not even mean that he got a dime, considering that his claims were originally dismissed. It might have been tactically wise to attempt to limit the losses incurred.

Problem is some people are just that desperate for a win against the paper.

Gotta dunk on anything that hurts Donald's feefees.

[Greed and Death]

viewtopic.php?p=36387242#p36387242

Yeah, I read that. But what's with the MAGA hat and the smug smirking? I couldn't find an explanation for it.

So the confrontation started when a group of black Israelite started spewing antisemitic bullshit. The teens then did what I would prefer teens to do when confronted by racist adults and heckled them.

At this juncture Phillips a native American in ceremonial attire appears. For whatever reason Phillips takes the bigot's side and opts to approach the boys beating his drum. His stated purpose defuse the situation. Though I take his word with a grain of salt as he has already lied about the events. He is on record stating that the boys in MAGA caps surrounded him. However the uncut video that WAPO had showed Phillips walking into the crowd of boys while the boys stood still, ie surrounding himself with the boys.

That's why the suit proceeded, WAPO made it look like the boys surrounded and heckled a Native American. The reality was the boys were heckling a bigot and Native American opted to walk into the middle of them and beat a drum in their faces. And WAPO knew better as they had the full tape.

[Kalaron]

Well here's hoping the Washington Post didn't issue a clarification or else the kid has zero case.

Oh wait, they did? Oof.

I'm frankly confused as to why the Judge gave them a go on 3 out of 33 statements.

So the WaPo's statements were all perfectly acceptable and accurate and non-libelous... Except for 3?

The WaPo could seriously just apologize or correct their articles and BLAM, all of a sudden the case evaporates... Again.

Reminds me of the Jim Sterling lawsuit. "This reporter ruined my life by reporting on what a shitty idiot I was."

Do you have a link to their clarification by chance? I didn't actually see them issue one, which means they probably did the standard media thing by doing the electronic equivalent of broadcasting the falsehood on the front page, while burying the retraction on page 37 right behind the obituaries.

I love when they claim something in the headlines but the article itself says something largely different. It's like they know the majority of people only get a paragraph into an Article and they can really set a narrative with their headlines.

[Greed and Death]

viewtopic.php?p=36387242#p36387242

Yeah, I read that. But what's with the MAGA hat and the smug smirking? I couldn't find an explanation for it.

The kid says he smiled because he was nervous and didn't know what else to do, when old dood beat a drum in his face.

[Picairn]

The kid says he smiled because he was nervous and didn't know what else to do, when old dood beat a drum in his face.

True, while others interpreted it as a smug smile, I thought it looked very awkward, so definitely a polite, fake smile to keep the decorum.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Yeah if the story itself spreads widely then a retraction once most people have put the story out of their minds won't get through. If you typed the name years later the high profile story would be more prominent than the retraction and that could harm someone's job chances and so on.

So cases like this which bring things back to the public eye can often be necessary.

[Greed and Death]

Well here's hoping the Washington Post didn't issue a clarification or else the kid has zero case.

Oh wait, they did? Oof.

I'm frankly confused as to why the Judge gave them a go on 3 out of 33 statements.

So the WaPo's statements were all perfectly acceptable and accurate and non-libelous... Except for 3?

The WaPo could seriously just apologize or correct their articles and BLAM, all of a sudden the case evaporates... Again.

Reminds me of the Jim Sterling lawsuit. "This reporter ruined my life by reporting on what a shitty idiot I was."

A retraction or clarification would not completely remove the claim of defamation as the damage would still be done. This is especially true for if the retraction/clarification has no where near the prominence as the original defaming article. Ie headline vs bottom left corner on page 7.

[Rusozak]

Yeah, I read that. But what's with the MAGA hat and the smug smirking? I couldn't find an explanation for it.

So the confrontation started when a group of black Israelite started spewing antisemitic bullshit. The teens then did what I would prefer teens to do when confronted by racist adults and heckled them.

At this juncture Phillips a native American in ceremonial attire appears. For whatever reason Phillips takes the bigot's side and opts to approach the boys beating his drum. His stated purpose defuse the situation. Though I take his word with a grain of salt as he has already lied about the events. He is on record stating that the boys in MAGA caps surrounded him. However the uncut video that WAPO had showed Phillips walking into the crowd of boys while the boys stood still, ie surrounding himself with the boys.

That's why the suit proceeded, WAPO made it look like the boys surrounded and heckled a Native American. The reality was the boys were heckling a bigot and Native American opted to walk into the middle of them and beat a drum in their faces. And WAPO knew better as they had the full tape.

I don't know, I have trouble buying that account of the events. It just doesn't add up. Is there actually irrefutable evidence that was the case or is it just one account versus another?

[Greed and Death]

So the confrontation started when a group of black Israelite started spewing antisemitic bullshit. The teens then did what I would prefer teens to do when confronted by racist adults and heckled them.

At this juncture Phillips a native American in ceremonial attire appears. For whatever reason Phillips takes the bigot's side and opts to approach the boys beating his drum. His stated purpose defuse the situation. Though I take his word with a grain of salt as he has already lied about the events. He is on record stating that the boys in MAGA caps surrounded him. However the uncut video that WAPO had showed Phillips walking into the crowd of boys while the boys stood still, ie surrounding himself with the boys.

That's why the suit proceeded, WAPO made it look like the boys surrounded and heckled a Native American. The reality was the boys were heckling a bigot and Native American opted to walk into the middle of them and beat a drum in their faces. And WAPO knew better as they had the full tape.

I don't know, I have trouble buying that account of the events. It just doesn't add up. Is there actually irrefutable evidence that was the case or is it just one account versus another?

That is pretty much the longer video posted ( like a 15 minute video). It is less an account and more them be the facts. No I wont dig the video up for you because this is several years ago.

[Shofercia]

Mods: If this is grave digging my apologies, I just thought an update on this case might warrant resurrecting this thread?
Washington Post settles lawsuit with Covington Catholic student Nicholas Sandmann

"On 2/19/19, I filed $250M defamation lawsuit against Washington Post. Today, I turned 18 & WaPo settled my lawsuit. Thanks to [Todd McMurtry] & [Lin Wood] for their advocacy. Thanks to my family & millions of you who have stood your ground by supporting me. I still have more to do," he shared on Twitter. "We have settled with WAPO and CNN. The fight isn’t over. 2 down. 6 to go. Don’t hold your breath [Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey]."

"We are pleased that we have been able to reach a mutually agreeable resolution of the remaining claims in this lawsuit," Kris Coratti, a spokesperson for the Washington Post told the Washington Examiner.

Judge William Bertelsman of the U.S. District Court in Eastern Kentucky, who initially dismissed the case in late July 2019 on the grounds the paper’s reporting was protected by the First Amendment, reinstated the case in October. But the judge narrowed the number of allegedly defamatory statements from 33 to three.

I was unaware that they were going after twitter.

Good. Time to hold yellow journalism, like Bezos' WaPo, to account.

I must have missed something. What was the issue regarding the defamation? What was the truth of the situation versus what the Post published?

Truth: pro-Trump kids were jamming with Native Americans
Bezos' WaPo: pro-Trump kids assaulted Native American

Maybe playing music together means assault to Jeff Bezos?

[Gravlen]

Yeah, I read that. But what's with the MAGA hat and the smug smirking? I couldn't find an explanation for it.

So the confrontation started when a group of black Israelite started spewing antisemitic bullshit. The teens then did what I would prefer teens to do when confronted by racist adults and heckled them.

At this juncture Phillips a native American in ceremonial attire appears. For whatever reason Phillips takes the bigot's side and opts to approach the boys beating his drum. His stated purpose defuse the situation. Though I take his word with a grain of salt as he has already lied about the events. He is on record stating that the boys in MAGA caps surrounded him. However the uncut video that WAPO had showed Phillips walking into the crowd of boys while the boys stood still, ie surrounding himself with the boys.

That's why the suit proceeded, WAPO made it look like the boys surrounded and heckled a Native American. The reality was the boys were heckling a bigot and Native American opted to walk into the middle of them and beat a drum in their faces. And WAPO knew better as they had the full tape.

That is not accurate. The "full tape" only surfaced well after the first rounds of reporting.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Mods: If this is grave digging my apologies, I just thought an update on this case might warrant resurrecting this thread?
Washington Post settles lawsuit with Covington Catholic student Nicholas Sandmann


I was unaware that they were going after twitter.

Good. Time to hold yellow journalism, like Bezos' WaPo, to account.

I must have missed something. What was the issue regarding the defamation? What was the truth of the situation versus what the Post published?

Truth: pro-Trump kids were jamming with Native Americans
Bezos' WaPo: pro-Trump kids assaulted Native American

Maybe playing music together means assault to Jeff Bezos?

I've heard some bad collabs, can't rule it out.

[Thermodolia]

So the confrontation started when a group of black Israelite started spewing antisemitic bullshit. The teens then did what I would prefer teens to do when confronted by racist adults and heckled them.

At this juncture Phillips a native American in ceremonial attire appears. For whatever reason Phillips takes the bigot's side and opts to approach the boys beating his drum. His stated purpose defuse the situation. Though I take his word with a grain of salt as he has already lied about the events. He is on record stating that the boys in MAGA caps surrounded him. However the uncut video that WAPO had showed Phillips walking into the crowd of boys while the boys stood still, ie surrounding himself with the boys.

That's why the suit proceeded, WAPO made it look like the boys surrounded and heckled a Native American. The reality was the boys were heckling a bigot and Native American opted to walk into the middle of them and beat a drum in their faces. And WAPO knew better as they had the full tape.

That is not accurate. The "full tape" only surfaced well after the first rounds of reporting.

Sounds like shit reporting. Unfortunately this has been brought on by the 24hr news cycle and the profit drive that has been unfortunately injected into our news

[Aclion]

Yeah, I don't know. I kind of remember the incident and the smugly smiling photo but after that, the news cycle is brutal and it faded.

Something to keep in mind, people.

The suit was SETTLED.

He didn't WIN, nor do we know how much money he got in the settlement.

My guess is, the WaPo gave him the money to make this go away, not because he had a point. Someone said he got 50 million? When 90% of the claims were dropped because they were bullshit?

A thing to remember about settlements in very public cases, and on of most interesting insights into the case i've gotten;
Often a party to a case will settle purely to avoid discovery. Had this case gone forward Sandmanns attorneys would be able to subpoena all sorts of documents about the reporting of the case, the release of which might be more damaging to the WaPo then what he asked for in damages.

[The Black Forrest]

Something to keep in mind, people.

The suit was SETTLED.

He didn't WIN, nor do we know how much money he got in the settlement.

My guess is, the WaPo gave him the money to make this go away, not because he had a point. Someone said he got 50 million? When 90% of the claims were dropped because they were bullshit?

A thing to remember about settlements in very public cases, and on of most interesting insights into the case i've gotten;
Often a party to a case will settle purely to avoid discovery. Had this case gone forward Sandmanns attorneys would be able to subpoena all sorts of documents about the reporting of the case, the release of which might be more damaging to the WaPo then what he asked for in damages.

If you have a shot at damages, why settle?

[Gravlen]

Something to keep in mind, people.

The suit was SETTLED.

He didn't WIN, nor do we know how much money he got in the settlement.

My guess is, the WaPo gave him the money to make this go away, not because he had a point. Someone said he got 50 million? When 90% of the claims were dropped because they were bullshit?

A thing to remember about settlements in very public cases, and on of most interesting insights into the case i've gotten;
Often a party to a case will settle purely to avoid discovery. Had this case gone forward Sandmanns attorneys would be able to subpoena all sorts of documents about the reporting of the case, the release of which might be more damaging to the WaPo then what he asked for in damages.

We won’t know since it’s all kept confidential, but if what you suggest is true in this case, it reflects poorly on Sandmann who supposedly went into this to really stick it to WaPo on an ideological basis. But hey, being bought off is The American Way, so him being a greedy opportunist trading principles for some fast cash wouldn’t be a surprise.

[Gravlen]

That is not accurate. The "full tape" only surfaced well after the first rounds of reporting.

Sounds like shit reporting. Unfortunately this has been brought on by the 24hr news cycle and the profit drive that has been unfortunately injected into our news

I won’t defend the quality of the reporting, but it’s obvious that nothing in WaPo reporting fell afoul if libel laws. There was no defamation by WaPo.

As I said earlier:

Phillips said in an interview to the Washington Post that 'the guy in the hat stood in my way and we were at an impasse. He just blocked my way and wouldn't allow me to retreat'.

Now, my question is, how have I, with my statement here in this post, defamed Sandmann?

[Asle Leopolka]

Good. WaPo has been a rag since Bezos bought it so it's high time they start sorting their house.

Is it now? What’s an acceptable newspaper?

WSJ, Houston Chronicle, and Financial Times are my preferred print sources. I'm more partial to centrist and unbiased news sources a la Reuters, BBC, etc.

Anything that praises Trump rather than saying mean things about him.

Don't conflate my dislike for WaPo with support of that orangutang. A common fallacy here is that any criticism of left-leaning sources - regardless of validity or deservance - automatically makes you a Trump bootlicker; be better than that.

[-Astoria-]

A common fallacy here is that any criticism of left-leaning sources - regardless of validity or deservance - automatically makes you a Trump bootlicker; be better than that.

Hmm; so correlation doesn't = causation, it seems.

[Kalaron]

A thing to remember about settlements in very public cases, and on of most interesting insights into the case i've gotten;
Often a party to a case will settle purely to avoid discovery. Had this case gone forward Sandmanns attorneys would be able to subpoena all sorts of documents about the reporting of the case, the release of which might be more damaging to the WaPo then what he asked for in damages.

We won’t know since it’s all kept confidential, but if what you suggest is true in this case, it reflects poorly on Sandmann who supposedly went into this to really stick it to WaPo on an ideological basis. But hey, being bought off is The American Way, so him being a greedy opportunist trading principles for some fast cash wouldn’t be a surprise.

Sticking it to someone is relative to the amount of trouble it's worth. Besides, I wouldn't be surprised if the settlement included an informal deal not to dig deep into the Kid's life for retaliatory information. He's already got to deal with Covington, wouldn't it be just terrible if some totally legal investigative journalism revealed that he used a certain word online? Or if it suddenly became known that he was a furry and he was subsequently ostracized at school?
I'm glad he got his money, fighting the media -and especially Bezo's corner of the media- is dangerous for one's wellbeing.

[Gravlen]

We won’t know since it’s all kept confidential, but if what you suggest is true in this case, it reflects poorly on Sandmann who supposedly went into this to really stick it to WaPo on an ideological basis. But hey, being bought off is The American Way, so him being a greedy opportunist trading principles for some fast cash wouldn’t be a surprise.

Sticking it to someone is relative to the amount of trouble it's worth. Besides, I wouldn't be surprised if the settlement included an informal deal not to dig deep into the Kid's life for retaliatory information. He's already got to deal with Covington, wouldn't it be just terrible if some totally legal investigative journalism revealed that he used a certain word online? Or if it suddenly became known that he was a furry and he was subsequently ostracized at school?
I'm glad he got his money, fighting the media -and especially Bezo's corner of the media- is dangerous for one's wellbeing.

What money? We don’t know that he got a dime.

In fact, if your theory is true, he might have agreed to pay them in order to keep such information under wraps. Unlikely, but not impossible.

[Grinning Dragon]

Sticking it to someone is relative to the amount of trouble it's worth. Besides, I wouldn't be surprised if the settlement included an informal deal not to dig deep into the Kid's life for retaliatory information. He's already got to deal with Covington, wouldn't it be just terrible if some totally legal investigative journalism revealed that he used a certain word online? Or if it suddenly became known that he was a furry and he was subsequently ostracized at school?
I'm glad he got his money, fighting the media -and especially Bezo's corner of the media- is dangerous for one's wellbeing.

What money? We don’t know that he got a dime.

I dunno, Sandmann was represented by L. Lin Wood the same man who represented Mr. Jewels back in the day. I just don't see Mr. Wood walking away from the table without a dollar amount hammered out.