Careercow Kurt Eichenwald / Roy Rogers / Andrew McDonald - Litigious Failed Journalist, Epileptic Sped, Trump Derangement Incarnate, Hentai Weeaboo Racist, Sexist, Suspected Pedo, Living Centrist Democrat Meme

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
JustStopDude said:
3) What damages did Kurt do?
Click to expand...

Damages don't have to be specific and clearly tied to the defamation to have a viable defamation case. Kurt presents himself as an influential person... he even has "New York Times bestselling author" in his bio (since it's the only thing he has left). All the kid has to do is say "He's telling lies about me and my character, this could hurt my chances for getting into college or getting a job in the future, since he's a well-known journalist and author".

Kurt's only real avenue to avoiding losing a defamation suit would be that he would have to prove that the rather concrete allegations he made against Kashuv were true, and he can't. The only way the "It's so stupid no one would believe it" defense would work is if you could prove Kurt knew it was so stupid that he sincerely believed no one would take it as him speaking the truth, in other words that he said it as a joke, and there aren't any indicators of this, it fits in too well with other stuff he's said in seriousness.

I'm sure he'd try his "I had a seizure and didn't know what I was saying" defense since he believes it's a magical cure-all (much like Chris and technically saying the words "I'm sorry"), but he'd have to have a doctor actually testify that his seizures can do that and good luck trying to find a doctor that'll commit perjury for him at this point.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Adamska, Ohoolihan, ChevroletBlackboard and 5 others
Jigglyjogglers said:
Damages don't have to be specific and clearly tied to the defamation to have a viable defamation case. Kurt presents himself as an influential person... he even has "New York Times bestselling author" in his bio (since it's the only thing he has left). All the kid has to do is say "He's telling lies about me and my character, this could hurt my chances for getting into college or getting a job in the future, since he's a well-known journalist and author".
Click to expand...

This is a very, very good point. Most people can talk shit with relative impunity. They have no special position. Shit they talk has no real meaning. Suppose you're Kurt Eichenwald, though. You're talking shit about people. You're talking defamatory shit about people. You're not just talking shit, at that point, you're talking shit as Mr. Newsweek, Mr. MSNBC. You're talking shit as someone who has authoriTAH. And as Eichenwald does, he routinely screams RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH! It's not like this authority is incidental. He is very urgent in insisting he has this authority.

So he isn't just some guy saying some stuff. He is some guy screaming defamatory bullshit and at the same time demanding he is literally doing it from a position of authority.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Adamska, Maiden-TieJuan, Ohoolihan and 12 others
Anonymus Fluhre said:
Sad thing is is that the Left, Right and Center would help fund it. Everyone is talking about Kurt's stupidity. It would get funded in a month at the very least. Hell, Kurt being a supposed Jew would even get Alt and Far spectrum people to fund it.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, Kyle seems like a chill guy that just shrugs stuff off.
 
  • Optimistic
  • Feels
Reactions: Kiwi FBI Liason, ChevroletBlackboard, The Great Chandler and 1 other person
Jigglyjogglers said:
Damages don't have to be specific and clearly tied to the defamation to have a viable defamation case. Kurt presents himself as an influential person... he even has "New York Times bestselling author" in his bio (since it's the only thing he has left). All the kid has to do is say "He's telling lies about me and my character, this could hurt my chances for getting into college or getting a job in the future, since he's a well-known journalist and author".
Click to expand...

That will not work in a US court as simple as you imply. To prove financial harm, the young man would have to show physical records indicate the actual cost to him. He cannot claim potential future earnings that do not exist. Even if Kurt was not idiot and targeted this kid, there is no proof he ends up in college.

So like for example, I am homeless man and drunk driver strikes and kills me. My family could not sue and claim that I was going to get clean, I was going to become brain surgeon, and I will become very rich and famous. It is sort of similar, messy situation. In the same fashion, the court will not reward this kid for the potential earnings he doesn't have. It is not how the US civil court system works.

The young man could make argument for emotional and mental anguish, but again, he has to show documented proof. He can't just say Kurt made him feel bad. He has to show that Kurt has caused him demonstrated, documented harm. Basically shrink bills.

Defamation lawsuits in US are NOTORIOUSLY difficult. I'm all for the kid doing it. I think it is very funny. But I do not think it would be successful. But this is just personal opinion.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Done, ChevroletBlackboard, Dilligaff and 1 other person
upload_2018-4-3_21-27-54.png

upload_2018-4-3_21-28-2.png

Admit it Kyle! You lurk here!
 
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: sick_hypnotic, Adamska, Elaine Benes and 42 others
JustStopDude said:
I am not US lawyer, so this is rambling nonsense potentially but i highly doubt a successful defamation case could be brought in this situation. I would image that Kurt lawyer could make a couple of arguments, of various strengths.

I think this would be a civil matter...

1) Kid is public figure - To quote movie..."Bold strategy Cotton". I think this would be laugh out of court and would potentially poison judge/jury against Kurt. So I doubt it would be used.

2) Claim that Kurt statements are so insane...so out of touch with reality, that it is protected speech. My understanding is the US Supreme Court say statements that are so ridiculous to be clearly not true are protected from libel claims to protect comedians and what not I think. Effectively Kurt lawyer claims Kurt is playing character and no reasonable person would or should fall for obvious humor. I think he would have decent shot with this depending on quality of lawyer and money spent.

Given his current behavior, I think a good lawyer could lay ground work that Kurt is an Andy Kaufman style humorist.

3) What damages did Kurt do? His argument that is there is no financial damages to kid. So the court cannot fix issue with money. Like many situations people think they can sue but unless they can show the court can correct the issue with money, the court will not follow through. This I feel is weakest portion of potential liable lawsuit. Kid would have to show that idiot Kurt has financially hurt him in some way that is measurable. One cannot just go with emotional pain or whatever....one has to work the way up to that.

You wish to sue me over something, you need to prove that I knowingly, with responsibility, did or failed to do something that caused you personal damage, that can be corrected by the court.

It is good for Kurt this is not Europe. He would easily be facing not only civil litigation (the laws favor person suing much more in EU in slander/libel cases) but also criminal litigation.

Again, I am not US lawyer. My legal experience is extremely limited and should not be taken at any value.
Click to expand...

A few others can better answer this, but it is likely that Kyle would not be viewed by the court as a "public Figure". An underage victim of a horrific crime is generally given some leeway there. But it may be argued that while his story is of public interest, he did not step into this or put himself out there voluntarily. Where minors are concerned US courts will generally err towards Private Individual. Where Kurt gets into some real trouble is with those psychiatrist claims made to Ben Shapiro about Kyle. That is defamatory and is getting into some deeply questionable areas. What was the purpose of that conversation with Shapiro? It seemed to be Eichenwald attempting to extort something out of Shapiro or to extort Shapiro to extort something out of Kyle via clear threat of defamation. And yes telling the world that "I have psychiatrists who believe that Kyle is clinically insane" is something for which actual damages can be awarded. It is an attempt to interfere with his future education and employment prospects, right at the moment the child is developing them. It's in fact heinous. The fact that it is a coordinated threat backed by what clearly seems to be or feels like an attempt at extortion could be construed as a criminal act depending on jurisdiction and how enterprising the DA is. At least it would be if it was done by a normie and not a protected class such as an insane megalomaniacal has been journalist well on his way to Super Villainy.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Dr. Merkwurdichliebe, Ohoolihan, LordofTendons and 1 other person
JustStopDude said:
That will not work in a US court as simple as you imply. To prove financial harm, the young man would have to show physical records indicate the actual cost to him.
Click to expand...
Not with defamation per se, which both Texas and Florida courts recognize. Allegations or imputations of mental illness qualify.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ChevroletBlackboard and Apteryx Owenii
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back