Breaking: Nicholas Sandmann Sues WaPo For $250 Million

He doesn't have much chance of winning cash. He might get an apology, but not much else.

But he does have a chance and a chance at a settlement, but maybe more importantly (and a possible greater motivation for him, if not the lawyer) is to keep this story in the news for as long as possible so that the evidence of him being the good guy who was wrongfully accused is known and acknowledged by everyone.

What would be nice is if this lawsuit to brought about an epiphany for the Media to use their Freedom of the Press wisely, with more discretion and even though they don't care that their actions can be detrimental to the innocent and society's unity, maybe they will be slower to shape the news since their reputations and pocket books are on the line.

It probably won't happen, at least long term, but we can hope. :)
 
He doesn't have much chance of winning cash. He might get an apology, but not much else.

But he does have a chance and a chance at a settlement, but maybe more importantly (and a possible greater motivation for him, if not the lawyer) is to keep this story in the news for as long as possible so that the evidence of him being the good guy who was wrongfully accused is known and acknowledged by everyone.

What would be nice is if this lawsuit to brought about an epiphany for the Media to use their Freedom of the Press wisely, with more discretion and even though they don't care that their actions can be detrimental to the innocent and society's unity, maybe they will be slower to shape the news since their reputations and pocket books are on the line.

It probably won't happen, at least long term, but we can hope. :)

Oh, he'll get a payday. Richard Jewell (of Atlanta Olympic bombing fame) received significant sums in settlements. And in Jewel's case the press did not misreport. Sandmann has a much stronger case.

As to whether the press will have learned anything? I doubt it. The rot in the press is much like that in the FBI. It's at the top, the editor and his/her staff and the fact that we're living in a world of 5 min. news cycles. Where's Monty Python when you need them? A kit of "Beat the Clock" with newsies being the contestants would become an instant classic.
 
Good for him.

And, no, they do not learn*, they went from him straight to Jussie Smollett.
Meanwhile, think of all that they are pretty much ignoring in Virginia.



* They sell their product to people who want to hear about the evil that is their fellow Americans, the ones that they are so ashamed of.


PS - Keith, if you weren't such a toxic poster, maybe we would open and participate in your threads, but we know that we are not welcome and get the full Covington from you and your friends.
 
Last edited:
He doesn't have much chance of winning cash. He might get an apology, but not much else.

WAPO's response to the suit was:

"We are going to mount a vigorous defense."


Which is a legal code phrase for: "How much do you want and how do we get out without looking like complete asshats?"

This suit is only 1 of many suits the kid is looking at with significant paychecks attached. He might be American's newest billionaire before he's 21.
 
they will scream the 1st A

they will also CENSOR anyone who doesnt tow NIGGER LINE
 
Over the course of my extinguished career I was threatened with lawsuits a few times. Once I got a woman out the door by promising never to use the last name "Williams" again in a story. It happened to be her asshole son's name, as well as the last name of the county manager.
Her son ended up spending significant time in jail.
After she and her glowering but silent son left, the other customers buying classified ads at the counter snickered. I was just happy I didn't wet myself. The Williams boy was not a nice guy.
Anyway, this young man from Kentucky has grounds to sue and a lot of people he can sue.
Good for him that he has a competent attorney. It was reckless reporting and the "reporters" knew it.
 
The standard is high

But he was not a public figure

And there was a definite intent of malice and misrepresenting the facts

The standard will be lower for a private citizen and a minor. I see there was an article quoting Clarence Thomas wanting a review of of the 1964 SCOTUS decision that tightened libel laws to protect the press. That was back in the time when we still had a free and independent press.
 
Oh, he'll get a payday. Richard Jewell (of Atlanta Olympic bombing fame) received significant sums in settlements. And in Jewel's case the press did not misreport. Sandmann has a much stronger case.

Excellent.


As to whether the press will have learned anything? I doubt it. The rot in the press is much like that in the FBI. It's at the top, the editor and his/her staff and the fact that we're living in a world of 5 min. news cycles. Where's Monty Python when you need them? A kit of "Beat the Clock" with newsies being the contestants would become an instant classic.

That's a big part of this problem. Competition for those internet clicks have lead to misleading headlines, anonymous tipsters for EVERY article, distorted facts to out right wrong facts to a brief blurb that says, "We'll be back with the story once we get more details." And if they're wrong, maybe they'll issue a small, two line correction or play it off as "We don't have all the facts yet."
 
Back
Top