Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst
1
2
  1. #21
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    79,181
    Quote Originally Posted by callipygoustp View Post
    The more often that people who pull this shit are held accountable, the better.

    Kind of wish the family had said "fuck the money, we want these lying assholes on the stand" but, they're grieving I'm not.
    Plus, it's often a choice between "seven figure settlement and this is over" and "years more fighting this shit in the courts, at great personal legal expense, in the hopes that someday you might win and garner a seven-figure settlement and a public apology".

    I had a parent get unlawfully terminated from a relatively high-end position with an engineering firm. They totally had a winnable case. It was just gonna take a couple years of court time with the defendant maligning them the whole time. It ended up not being worth the fight. I'd like to see Fox News' feet held to the fire myself, but that's something I want for me, and it's not for the benefit of the Rich family.


  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You don't need to prove intent at all.

    You need only prove that any reasonable person would know that such a story would be emotionally distressing to its subjects.

    You also don't need to prove it was a lie. The onus is entirely on the party who pushed the story to justify that they had good-faith reasonable confidence that the story was likely true.

    Somehow, you've got this stuff entirely backwards. Are you unfamiliar with how civil suits work? They aren't criminal cases, and don't abide by the same standards of evidence and there is no presumption of innocence whatsoever.
    Thats actually not true in the US. In Canada you are correct, in USA libel still requires intent with a reasonable doubt. Even in Canada, its not as clear cut as you put it no. Theres many cases with different pleas you can go with as a journalist. In Canada the biggest different is you dont need to prove damage for libel, but you do for defamation. Even in Canade for defamation case, the onus is on you to prove you suffered damage. Theres are also different pleas that protect certain speech from being defamation that can include some journalistic activities.
    Last edited by minteK917; 2020-11-27 at 12:14 AM.

  3. #23
    Ah, good ol’ Faux News.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •