or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

killing Trayvon - Page 272

post #4066 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

I tried to avoid the media coverage so I can't really offer a specific opinion. But while it is possible to sue members of the media for defamation, the standards for prevailing are really high. In order to overcome the protections of the First Amendment, you have to show malice to get damages, which basically requires proving that they made defamatory statements they knew to be false. That's a very loose paraphrase, and it has been years since I looked at the jurisprudence.

 

This may not be true here. The standard that a plaintiff show malice occurred comes out of New York Times v. Sullivan. In that case, the plaintiff alleging libel was a the Montgomery Public Safety Commissioner, a political position. In that case, the Supreme Court held that some libelous speech was protected by the First Amendment, because it was an important part of public, political discourse. Basically, journalists can libel public figures so long as they don't do it maliciously. 

 

If I were Zimmerman's lawyer, I'd argue that in spite of how much coverage this case has received, he's not really a public figure in the sense that NYT v. Sullivan imagined. He didn't run for office, or place himself in the public arena intentionally, and therefore he shouldn't have reach that higher standard in order to show that libel occurred. 

 

Now, that being said, truth is an absolute defense to libel claims. Even if news media creatively edited some recordings, they'd say that the recordings are what they are, and that airing them in any form can't be libelous by definition. 

post #4067 of 6250
Occupy Wall St. is doing a live stream of Chicago Trayvon Verdict Protests

http://blog.al.com/wire/2013/07/occupy_wall_street_live-stream.html

PS: One of the comments in the comments section,
tagzilla
"Chicago protesting a gun death outcome in Florida. That is rich."
post #4068 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post

Occupy Wall St. is doing a live stream of Chicago Trayvon Verdict Protests

http://blog.al.com/wire/2013/07/occupy_wall_street_live-stream.html

So it sounds quiet, and that's good, but I suspect half the country could be burning right now and the media wouldn't report it for a couple days.
post #4069 of 6250
I live right next to a public housing project and nothing is burning.
post #4070 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post

I live right next to a public housing project and nothing is burning.

That's a good thing. Right?
post #4071 of 6250

Why do you think witness 9 never testified? 46 calls over 8 years is about 6 a year. There were 8 burglaries in the neighborhood within 14 months prior to the incident. Was he not justified to call in suspicious activities? What else Hayward?
post #4072 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by diniro View Post

Why do you think witness 9 never testified?

Because what she's saying is irrelevant and highly prejudicial. As is all the rest of this stuff.
post #4073 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshuadowen View Post

This may not be true here. The standard that a plaintiff show malice occurred comes out of New York Times v. Sullivan. In that case, the plaintiff alleging libel was a the Montgomery Public Safety Commissioner, a political position. In that case, the Supreme Court held that some libelous speech was protected by the First Amendment, because it was an important part of public, political discourse. Basically, journalists can libel public figures so long as they don't do it maliciously. 

If I were Zimmerman's lawyer, I'd argue that in spite of how much coverage this case has received, he's not really a public figure in the sense that NYT v. Sullivan imagined. He didn't run for office, or place himself in the public arena intentionally, and therefore he shouldn't have reach that higher standard in order to show that libel occurred. 

Now, that being said, truth is an absolute defense to libel claims. Even if news media creatively edited some recordings, they'd say that the recordings are what they are, and that airing them in any form can't be libelous by definition. 

The standard has been expanded to "figures of public interest" or something like that. Zimmerman would fit. Malice is defined differently, basically knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth. NBC is absolutely guilty of that. Your last sentence is where I see it getting tripped up. It's not a bright line. If they had taken words or lines out of his speech then I would say it's a slam dunk. Because his words are played and only the dispatcher's words are edited out, they might get away with it.
post #4074 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchausen View Post

Because what she's saying is irrelevant and highly prejudicial. As is all the rest of this stuff.

she's a liar and tried to shop her story to various media outlets. She was also questioned by the FBI, who was tasked with discovering any type of hate crime in this incident, and admitted George Zimmerman was not a racist.
post #4075 of 6250
Quote:
“Today, justice failed Trayvon Martin and his family,” said Roslyn M. Brock, Chairman of the NAACP. “We call immediately for the Justice Department to conduct an investigation into the civil rights violations committed against Trayvon Martin. This case has re-energized the movement to end racial profiling in the United States.”

http://www.naacp.org/press/entry/naacp-statement-in-the-acquittal-of-george-zimmerman-in-the-killing-of-tray
post #4076 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcaimen View Post

Not only are there "many different colors of racism" , this case actually gave birth to a new one, White Hispanic.
No, SF was way ahead with the use of that term.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddievddr10 View Post

Sharpton claims civil suit was already filed so he's not immune, but it's Sharpton so who knows if he's just blowing smoke
Immunity doesn't stop the filing of the suit, it just prevents it from succeeding. Assuming there is absolute immunity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshuadowen View Post

This may not be true here. The standard that a plaintiff show malice occurred comes out of New York Times v. Sullivan. In that case, the plaintiff alleging libel was a the Montgomery Public Safety Commissioner, a political position. In that case, the Supreme Court held that some libelous speech was protected by the First Amendment, because it was an important part of public, political discourse. Basically, journalists can libel public figures so long as they don't do it maliciously. 

If I were Zimmerman's lawyer, I'd argue that in spite of how much coverage this case has received, he's not really a public figure in the sense that NYT v. Sullivan imagined. He didn't run for office, or place himself in the public arena intentionally, and therefore he shouldn't have reach that higher standard in order to show that libel occurred. 

Now, that being said, truth is an absolute defense to libel claims. Even if news media creatively edited some recordings, they'd say that the recordings are what they are, and that airing them in any form can't be libelous by definition. 
I skipped over that important point. Thanks for catching.
post #4077 of 6250
I wonder if Hayward has more info about Zimmerman than his family, friends, neighbors, professors, the prosecution team, SPD, FDLE, FBI, and DOJ.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0712/FBI-report-No-evidence-George-Zimmerman-is-racist
Quote:
After interviewing 30 people familiar with George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch captain charged with killing African-American teenager Trayvon Martin, FBI agents found no evidence that the shooting was driven by racial bias or animus.

Before Thursday's release of a Department of Justice report, both sides have argued over whether smatterings of racially charged testimony should be released to the public before the trial – in particular, the testimony of “Witness 9,” whom state prosecutors say has described an “act” by Mr. Zimmerman that suggests “he had a bias toward black people.”

The report released Thursday made clear that the FBI found no one willing to go on the record as saying Zimmerman is racist. Even one of the most skeptical local investigators with the Sanford, Fla., police department, Chris Serino, suggested to the FBI that Zimmerman followed Trayvon “based on his attire,” not “skin color,” and added that he thought Zimmerman had a “little hero complex,” but is not racist, according to the Orlando Sentinel, which obtained copies of the document.

-snip-
post #4078 of 6250
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/os-will-george-zimmerman-jury-remain-anonymous,0,7432600.story

Quote:
Will jurors in the George Zimmerman second-degree murder trial remain anonymous after the verdict?

A lawyer for the Orlando Sentinel sent a letter to Circuit Judge Debra Nelson, asking that she not make a ruling on how long she'll keep Zimmerman juror names secret without first holding a hearing.

The judge six weeks ago prohibited the disclosure of juror names as long as they were at work.

The six women who deliberated Zimmerman's fate are known to the public only by number.

Defense attorneys have asked the judge to extend that anonymity for six months. She, though, has made no ruling.

Media attorneys have opposed the idea, saying that to assure that trials remain an open and public process juror names should not be kept secret.

Rachel Fugate, a lawyer for the Sentinel and sister newspaper the Los Angeles Times, both of them covering the trial, today delivered a letter to the judge, pointing out that with deliberations underway, the issue is now ripe for reconsideration.

She asks that the judge hold a hearing on the issue before she makes a ruling.

I have to say it's probably a good idea to withhold their identities for at least a little while.
post #4079 of 6250
So other than a few broken windows in Oakland, there are no riots? That's reassuring.
post #4080 of 6250
Chicago getting back to normal. Just an average Saturday night with nothing unusual happening,

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-chicago-shootings-violence-20130714,0,4764624.story
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon