I am not supporting Rudy, I am attacking the corrupt legal system in which bleeding heart jurors want to award giant lottery prizes to people with no attention to what actual damages are. And gives 33 to 50 % of that prize to lawyers. Donald moved Rudy out of his circle of trust long ago and rightfully so.
Maybe Trump should have never had a lawyer that was dumb enough to defame two people in his circle of trust in the first place. Trump surrounds himself with idiots the same way a hole surrounds itself with donut.
According to Trump, he only hires the best people.
America has many, many problems but this is one of the most maddening. What would have the lifetime earnings of these two have been? The consept of "deep pockets" doesn't even apply with Rudy having already spent his fortune.
One of many reasons the 8th amendment exists. Excessive awards like this take away trust in the system.
IIRC RG tweeted about them. That's broadcasting. That's libel. In this case, not a real question.
Are we really going to be finding people guilty of libel by their tweets? The courtrooms are going to be pretty full.
He didn’t even mount a defense due to the criminal liability that would have come up if he handed over his communications. Trump is a criminal and surrounds himself with criminals.
IIRC RG tweeted about them. That's broadcasting. That's libel. In this case, not a real question.
Are we really going to be finding people guilty of libel by their tweets? The courtrooms are going to be pretty full.
At the risk of repetition: In this case, NOT A REAL QUESTION. Clearer?
Defamation by speech is slander, defamation by broadcasting (etc.) is libel. Those legal definitions are not at issue here. It was the defamation and the harm that it did to these women's lives that is the question in this case. "Mean tweets" are not (automatically) torts; destroying people's lives and livelihoods with falsehoods, which it seems happened here--to the extent that they live in hiding, we're told, and may have to change their names, yada--surely is tortious.
As I already posted above, and as someone reminded us by mentioning the Eighth Amendment, the jury's award is very likely to be reduced substantially. But given that Giuliani will almost certainly not be able to pay whatever the ultimate award is, the appellate court may keep the number fairly high, for its deterrent effect on others.
Free speech does not protect falsehoods, especially knowing falsehoods, that objectively (an assessment made by the tryer of fact) harm businesses or other people. Fox News and Donald Trump were already reminded of that this year; now Rudy Giuliani has been, as well.
Repeated false statements in public about two non-public individuals that damaged their reputations.
How have you lived this long and been unaware of what libel is?
I know what libel is. I was not very aware of this case and had not known they had suffered so much. My only point was that people say libelous stuff in tweets all the time. I am not equating what Rudy G. did to those comments that might be considered libelous.
Really? For questioning the results of an election.
Amerika
He was not sued "for questioning the results of an election." You should try to learn the basics of what a thread is about before posting in it. Because you just look like a childish clown pipping in with confused, ignorant stuff like you posted.
Repeated false statements in public about two non-public individuals that damaged their reputations.
How have you lived this long and been unaware of what libel is?
I know what libel is. I was not very aware of this case and had not known they had suffered so much. My only point was that people say libelous stuff in tweets all the time. I am not equating what Rudy G. did to those comments that might be considered libelous.
But you did equate what Rudy G. did to libelous tweets. You got called out and now you’re backpedaling.
We've updated our BetterRunningShoes.com web site to make it easier to find good deals on the best shoes. To keep it great we need new shoe reviews from you.