I was just letting that little Nole fan over there know that. I won't stand by while someone grills someone about something that they are technically right about.

No way he can stay in New York with the press out to get anyone who has even swallowed a child's Flintstones multi-vitamin.

 

If the Yankees pay his contract, yeah, I'd take him. Depending on the prospects.

You can get sued for libel if you write something slanderous on a bathroom stall and they can tell it was you.

 

You need only 2 people for libel. The person who wrote the slanderous stuff and someone, who it is not about, who reads it.

 

So Chin High is right. I am a jounalism major, so we had to study libel at nasuem so I know quite a bit about it, I really don't want to break out the text book and give you a clear cut definition of it. But yes, if JP wanted he could sue Rocky for libel.

626423[/snapback]

 

Wrong, my friend. I'm a laywer. Bring that first post of the thread in a court room and try me. A judge would laugh your ass out of the court room and give you dirty looks for being an idiot. Even if a judge felt sorry for you and gave you the elements, which is possible on a pure element basis, you'd get $1 in damages. You have to PROVE damage to your reputation to be awarded money in a defamation situation. NO ONE would take the post seriously as saying Pierre is actually on steriods, especially considering the actual post had nothing to do with that. No REASONALBE person would believe the statement is true; therefore, it would not defame his reputation.

 

Break out the text book, Phish. In the practical world, I'd bitch slap it back to you so hard your nuts would bleed. :thumbup

Gotta love the modesty and courtesy on this board as of late. :whistle

I was just letting that little Nole fan over there know that. I won't stand by while someone grills someone about something that they are technically right about.

626545[/snapback]

 

Break out the book. I asked what the idiot knew about the law since he thinks the poster can be sued in a court. Any lawyer with half a brain would get Pierre laughed out of court even if he had the greatest lawyer in the world on his side.

 

If you want to get cute, break out your book and lets go. I'll make you wish you never typed a word once I have you in circles.

 

Bring it.... :hat

You can get sued for libel if you write something slanderous on a bathroom stall and they can tell it was you.

 

You need only 2 people for libel. The person who wrote the slanderous stuff and someone, who it is not about, who reads it.

 

So Chin High is right. I am a jounalism major, so we had to study libel at nasuem so I know quite a bit about it, I really don't want to break out the text book and give you a clear cut definition of it. But yes, if JP wanted he could sue Rocky for libel.

626423[/snapback]

 

Wrong, my friend. I'm a laywer. Bring that first post of the thread in a court room and try me. A judge would laugh your ass out of the court room and give you dirty looks for being an idiot. Even if a judge felt sorry for you and gave you the elements, which is possible on a pure element basis, you'd get $1 in damages. You have to PROVE damage to your reputation to be awarded money in a defamation situation. NO ONE would take the post seriously as saying Pierre is actually on steriods, especially considering the actual post had nothing to do with that. No REASONALBE person would believe the statement is true; therefore, it would not defame his reputation.

 

Break out the text book, Phish. In the practical world, I'd bitch slap it back to you so hard your nuts would bleed. :thumbup

626642[/snapback]

:thumbup

Gotta love the modesty and courtesy on this board as of late. :whistle

626646[/snapback]

 

When one idiot runs around saying someone should be banned for the first dumb post in this thread when it was an obvious bad joke, and another fool chimes in on subjects he doesn't know jack about, yeah, they'll get no courtesy from me.

 

I don't care if I like the guy, which I do for Phish in the past. If someone says "little Nole" thinking he knows something to take a shot at me when he doesn't know s*** on the subject, I'll bitch slap the dude till he learns journalism school doesn't teach him what happens in a real court. He doesn't know a damn thing about defamation in the real world. Because if he did, he would have never interjected himself in this thread.

Gotta love the modesty and courtesy on this board as of late.? :whistle

626646[/snapback]

 

When one idiot runs around saying someone should be banned for the first dumb post in this thread when it was an obvious bad joke, and another fool chimes in on subjects he doesn't know jack about, yeah, they'll get no courtesy from me.

 

I don't care if I like the guy, which I do for Phish in the past. If someone says "little Nole" thinking he knows something to take a shot at me when he doesn't know s*** on the subject, I'll bitch slap the dude till he learns journalism school doesn't teach him what happens in a real court. He doesn't know a damn thing about defamation in the real world. Because if he did, he would have never interjected himself in this thread.

626656[/snapback]

You preach to the chior in me, but they imagery was a little excessive....don't you think?

Libel is a legal term that describes a written form of defamation, which the dictionary defines as a "false or unjustified injury to someone's good reputation." Sometimes the word slander is used in the same breath as libel. The two terms mean the same thing, except that slander usually refers to defamatory statements about someone that are spoken to others rather than written in a newspaper, magazine article, or book. Today the legal differences between libel and slander have all but disappeared due largely to the dawning of the electronic age.

http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/press/press08.htm

 

I would think accussing JP, a team player, a realtively good guy, of using steriods is injuring his good reputation, but what do I know right?

 

Libel

False words, which damage another person's reputation or good character and are conveyed in a lasting manner, especially writing. See e.g. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). See also defamation, slander.

http://cfr.law.cornell.edu/lexicon/libel.htm

 

 

You saying if JP was accused of 'roiding up his image wouldn't be hurt at all?

Gotta love the modesty and courtesy on this board as of late.? :whistle

626646[/snapback]

 

When one idiot runs around saying someone should be banned for the first dumb post in this thread when it was an obvious bad joke, and another fool chimes in on subjects he doesn't know jack about, yeah, they'll get no courtesy from me.

 

I don't care if I like the guy, which I do for Phish in the past. If someone says "little Nole" thinking he knows something to take a shot at me when he doesn't know s*** on the subject, I'll bitch slap the dude till he learns journalism school doesn't teach him what happens in a real court. He doesn't know a damn thing about defamation in the real world. Because if he did, he would have never interjected himself in this thread.

626656[/snapback]

You preach to the chior in me, but they imagery was a little excessive....don't you think?

626669[/snapback]

 

Cape,

 

If he said:

 

I was just letting that little "Fish boy" over there know that. I won't stand by while someone grills someone about something that they are technically right about.

 

To you when you knew the truth and he was a complete idiot on the manner, how would you take it? I'm sure we're different in some respects. Even though I'm older, I'm sure I'm a more "in your face" type of guy than you, but I'm sure you can even see my point. You're 16 and haven't been through 4 years at FSU with an A average and aren't on the hook for 40 grand in loans from a top 45 law school. If you were and read that crap, you'd probably bitch slap him just as hard as I did.

 

I have no problem with different opinions. Hell, I like you even if I disagree on a lot of things. I like Phish disagreeing on the Dunn/Beckett deal and many discussions. However, I won't take that insult without being an a**hole back to him. Admin or a mod could try that with me and I'd be a complete jackass to them until they ban me. I just have pride in my work.

 

I didn't start my post to start a legal c**k measure war. Quite frankly, I don't care about what anyone does or what they think of what I do. However, when someone jumps into a fight that isn't his and thinks he can embaress this "little Nole" in the legal field, that punk will be bitch slapped really quickly and exposed for not knowing a damn thing compared to me in most legal areas.

 

One day you may understand after 7 years of school and a lot of money.

 

Hopefully the thread will move on from this soon, though. I didn't mean to start this crap. I had no idea someone else would jump in from that post trying to prove a point when that person didn't know a damn thing about the legal world.

Gotta love the modesty and courtesy on this board as of late.? :whistle

626646[/snapback]

 

When one idiot runs around saying someone should be banned for the first dumb post in this thread when it was an obvious bad joke, and another fool chimes in on subjects he doesn't know jack about, yeah, they'll get no courtesy from me.

 

I don't care if I like the guy, which I do for Phish in the past. If someone says "little Nole" thinking he knows something to take a shot at me when he doesn't know s*** on the subject, I'll bitch slap the dude till he learns journalism school doesn't teach him what happens in a real court. He doesn't know a damn thing about defamation in the real world. Because if he did, he would have never interjected himself in this thread.

626656[/snapback]

You preach to the chior in me, but they imagery was a little excessive....don't you think?

626669[/snapback]

 

Cape,

 

If he said:

 

I was just letting that little "Fish boy" over there know that. I won't stand by while someone grills someone about something that they are technically right about.

 

To you when you knew the truth and he was a complete idiot on the manner, how would you take it? I'm sure we're different in some respects. Even though I'm older, I'm sure I'm a more "in your face" type of guy than you, but I'm sure you can even see my point. You're 16 and haven't been through 4 years at FSU with an A average and aren't on the hook for 40 grand in loans from a top 45 law school. If you were and read that crap, you'd probably bitch slap him just as hard as I did.

 

I have no problem with different opinions. Hell, I like you even if I disagree on a lot of things. I like Phish disagreeing on the Dunn/Beckett deal and many discussions. However, I won't take that insult without being an a**hole back to him. Admin or a mod could try that with me and I'd be a complete jackass to them until they ban me. I just have pride in my work.

 

I didn't start my post to start a legal c**k measure war. Quite frankly, I don't care about what anyone does or what they think of what I do. However, when someone jumps into a fight that isn't his and thinks he can embaress this "little Nole" in the legal field, that punk will be bitch slapped really quickly and exposed for not knowing a damn thing compared to me in most legal areas.

 

One day you may understand after 7 years of school and a lot of money.

 

Hopefully the thread will move on from this soon, though. I didn't mean to start this crap. I had no idea someone else would jump in from that post trying to prove a point when that person didn't know a damn thing about the legal world.

626680[/snapback]

 

I don't condone what he claimed. He was exaggerating it and sensationalized the situation of the BALCO Grand Jury admissions to get people to read the thread by using an abstract example that JP would take steriods....but is it really all that important to start an extremely uncivil bickerfest with someone. First rule of a professional is to stay civil and you immediately lunged at the throat. Had you used that language in court you would spend a few hot minutes being lectured to by a very heated judge who has at least twice the experience of yourself and makes more in a month than some make in your profession in a quarter.

 

The legal world is a very beautiful thing....don't lower it down to his level.

I would think accussing JP, a team player, a realtively good guy, of using steriods is injuring his good reputation, but what do I know right?

 

First off, you misspelled three words in one sentence. If you want to pull out your IQ d*** and try to get smart with me, at least spell check your statement first.

 

Let me explain something to you veryyyyyyyyy slowly. You have to prove damages to win a damn thing in a lawsuit. Defamation is one of the HARDEST areas in ALL LEGAL AREAS to recover a judgment in. You must PROVE your reputation was damaged in light of how a REASONABLE PERSON would interpret it. After that, you have to prove how MUCH your reputation was damaged.

 

Now, my genius, do you think the first statement would convince a REASONABLE person would believe this post was accurate?

 

 

 

Seriously, dawg, you don't know a damn thing about the law or you're a f***ing idiot. You choose which one you are after you read my above statements and the rest of this post.

 

You'll be hiring someone like me if you get sued for anything close to a "false statement" in the future. Going by your technical posts, I guess you assume Saturday Night Live pays out the ass for all their parodies of public figures. Hell, South Park ran an episode at the beginning of the year showing McGwire, Bonds, and Sosa being roided up. Gee, how much did they pay to those guys, jackass?

 

Phish, you're a cool guy and I like you, but give up. You bit off more than you are capable to chew in this area. Just admit it and move on before I put in an effort to embrace you. :plain

Nirvana, get some precedent, show it, and be done.

I don't condone what he claimed. He was exaggerating it and sensationalized the situation of the BALCO Grand Jury admissions to get people to read the thread by using an abstract example that JP would take steriods....but is it really all that important to start an extremely uncivil bickerfest with someone. First rule of a professional is to stay civil and you immediately lunged at the throat. Had you used that language in court you would spend a few hot minutes being lectured to by a very heated judge who has at least twice the experience of yourself and makes more in a month than some make in your profession in a quarter.

 

The legal world is a very beautiful thing....don't lower it down to his level.

626684[/snapback]

 

My friend, if you think any judge makes anywhere near the amount of the top lawyers in that area, you're really, really confused. Most judges make MUCH less than they would in the private world because they want the power that some judges have. A judge is like a politician. Any top politician can make more money in the private sector than they can in public service. They become politicians for the power.

 

Also, to consider this a court is a joke. I didn't get "mean" till I was called a "little Nole" by someone who doesn't know a damn thing about the legal system. Once someone crosses that line, I'll rip that person to shreds.

Judges don't make that much, but defamation lawyers make even less.

 

I didn't say this was a court. You have a bad knack for reading things that are convenient to you and attacking without reading it completely.

 

Here is the quote...

Had you used that language in court you would spend a few hot minutes being lectured to by a very heated judge...

Nirvana, get some precedent, show it, and be done.

626689[/snapback]

 

1. If you think I'm going to pay the charges Westlaw and Lexis charges to go get the statutes and case law to show Phish he is a joke, you're insane.

 

2. If you think I'm going back through my law school textbooks in storage to get the cases to show he's a moron, you're insane.

 

3. If you think I'm going to a law library to do manual research to get the cases to show Phish is clueless about legal matters regarding defamation, you're insance.

 

If you ever go to law school, graduate, and see how much that crap costs, you'll understand.

You have to prove damages to win a damn thing in a lawsuit.

 

You must PROVE your reputation was damaged in light of how a REASONABLE PERSON would interpret it. After that, you have to prove how MUCH your reputation was damaged.

 

Really? In a Libel Law suit?

 

Slander

A false statement, usually made orally, which defames another person. Unlike libel, damages from slander are not presumed and must be proven by the party suing.

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/lexicon/slander.htm

 

To me that means in libel suits damages can be presumed. So, someone wouldn't need to prove there have been damages done. At least by that definition, but I am sure Cornell's Law program is junk right, that's why you didn't go there and went to lowly ranked #67 FSU's Law school, while Cornell's is ranked 12th?

US News

 

Now, my genius, do you think the first statement would convince a REASONABLE person would believe this post was accurate?

 

 

The person doesn't have to be a sports fan. So if you found someone on the street, who didn't know sports, and you showed them the post they would probably believe it because a lot of people believe all players, or most are 'roiders, not everyone knows who JP is. So they reasonably can believe it. Unless you want to say everyone knows JP is a stick.

 

So between not knowing that you don't have to prove damages in libel cases and assuming everyone knows who JP is, I could say I blame FSU for such ignorance. But I respect them. I blame the student.

Judges don't make that much, but defamation lawyers make even less.

 

I didn't say this was a court. You have a bad knack for reading things that are convenient to you and attacking without reading it completely.

 

Here is the quote...

Had you used that language in court you would spend a few hot minutes being lectured to by a very heated judge...

626694[/snapback]

 

1. I don't know a single lawyer that only does defmation cases. So, there is no such thing as a pure defamation lawyer.

 

2. You brought in the way a lawyer is supposed to be brought in a court, so I said this isn't a court.

 

Good lord, why am I arguing with a 16 year old on this site that most posters make fun of for not being able to admit simple times that he is wrong.

 

Dumb me. I have to remember that you throw out statements that only lead to one conclusion that you later try to divert from you. Yeah, like I brought the court into this discussion. :blink:

Nirvana, get some precedent, show it, and be done.

626689[/snapback]

 

1. If you think I'm going to pay the charges Westlaw and Lexis charges to go get the statutes and case law to show Phish he is a joke, you're insane.

 

2. If you think I'm going back through my law school textbooks in storage to get the cases to show he's a moron, you're insane.

 

3. If you think I'm going to a law library to do manual research to get the cases to show Phish is clueless about legal matters regarding defamation, you're insance.

 

If you ever go to law school, graduate, and see how much that crap costs, you'll understand.

626698[/snapback]

Then why use such unprofessional a tone on something that is simple and elementary?

 

While searching on the topic, I found this interesting article on a Libel-By-Fiction case in Texas.

Judges don't make that much, but defamation lawyers make even less.

 

I didn't say this was a court. You have a bad knack for reading things that are convenient to you and attacking without reading it completely.

 

Here is the quote...

Had you used that language in court you would spend a few hot minutes being lectured to by a very heated judge...

626694[/snapback]

 

1. I don't know a single lawyer that only does defmation cases. So, there is no such thing as a pure defamation lawyer.

 

2. You brought in the way a lawyer is supposed to be brought in a court, so I said this isn't a court.

 

Good lord, why am I arguing with a 16 year old on this site that most posters make fun of for not being able to admit simple times that he is wrong.

 

Dumb me. I have to remember that you throw out statements that only lead to one conclusion that you later try to divert from you. Yeah, like I brought the court into this discussion. :blink:

626701[/snapback]

Then why are you arguing with me! That was the point! No lawyer makes libel or slander their only caseload because they would starve!

 

The reason I brought in court is because when you start speaking about your profession and wish to be respected as someone well entrenched in the understanding of their profession, then you should not use the attitude that you did above. There is no reason to get uncivil nor is there a reason to feel as if you are somehow don't have to answer to questions on your uncivility just because you have so-and-so qualifications and because the one questioning is "dumb."

You have to prove damages to win a damn thing in a lawsuit.

 

You must PROVE your reputation was damaged in light of how a REASONABLE PERSON would interpret it.? After that, you have to prove how MUCH your reputation was damaged.

 

Really? In a Libel Law suit?

 

Slander

? ? A false statement, usually made orally, which defames another person. Unlike libel, damages from slander are not presumed and must be proven by the party suing.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/lexicon/slander.htm

 

To me that means in libel suits damages can be presumed. So, someone wouldn't need to prove there have been damages done. At least by that definition, but I am sure Cornell's Law program is junk right, that's why you didn't go there and went to lowly ranked #67 FSU's Law school, while Cornell's is ranked 12th?

US News

 

Now, my genius, do you think the first statement would convince a REASONABLE person would believe this post was accurate?

 

 

The person doesn't have to be a sports fan. So if you found someone on the street, who didn't know sports, and you showed them the post they would probably believe it because a lot of people believe all players, or most are 'roiders, not everyone knows who JP is. So they reasonably can believe it. Unless you want to say everyone knows JP is a stick.

 

So between not knowing that you don't have to prove damages in libel cases and assuming everyone knows who JP is, I could say I blame FSU for such ignorance. But I respect them. I blame the student.

626700[/snapback]

 

Phish,

 

If you're too stupid to know what you're reading, I can't help you.

 

First off, I went to FSU for undergrad on full scholarship and to Bama for law school on partial scholarship. Bama is above every law school in the state of FL, if you're wondering.

 

Before I waste my time explaining things to you, look up the term "nominal damages." Once you get that definition, reread about "general damages." Just because you prove it by the elements, doesn't mean you'll get more than 1 cent from a judge. Once you see that definition for what is nominal damages and reread every generic link you find, start a new thread. If you don't get it by then, I'll explain it to ya.

 

I won't even bring in the fact any lawyer worth a damn makes at least $100 an hour and usually much more than that for a trial. If you had any clue how much it costs to do the research, write briefs, etc., to even start a lawsuit, you would have never said a word. I said you could establish the basic elements IF you assume a REASONABLE person believed that the statement defamed Pierre. By the way, public figures, like Pierre, have a MUCH HIGHER threshold to prove defamation than the general public.

 

See, my idiot, there are four main elements of common law defamation:

 

1. Defendant made a defamatory statement,

2. Of or concerning the plaintiff,

3. Publication thereof by defendant to a third person, and

4. DAMAGE to the plaintiff's reputation.

 

Good luck proving element 4 to a judge or jury. No one would believe the title and joking context of the post that DID NOT say Pierre used steroids damaged his reputation. If you can't prove that, you're DONE! If you do prove that, you have to prove how much it hurt his reputation in dollar amount. Gee, how much do yall think this thread hurt Pierre's reputation in the public's eye? Oh yeah, NONE! File that freakin' suit paying probably at least $200 for a lawyer in Miami and see how much money Pierre losses.

 

Until you learn something about the legal system, just shut your mouth.

Phish,

 

If you're too stupid to know what you're reading, I can't help you.

 

First off, I went to FSU for undergrad on full scholarship and to Bama for law school on partial scholarship. Bama is above every law school in the state of FL, if you're wondering.

 

Before I waste my time explaining things to you, look up the term "nominal damages." Once you get that definition, reread about "general damages." Just because you prove it by the elements, doesn't mean you'll get more than 1 cent from a judge. Once you see that definition for what is nominal damages and reread every generic link you find, start a new thread. If you don't get it by then, I'll explain it to ya.

 

I won't even bring in the fact any lawyer worth a damn makes at least $100 an hour and usually much more than that for a trial. If you had any clue how much it costs to do the research, write briefs, etc., to even start a lawsuit, you would have never said a word. I said you could establish the basic elements IF you assume a REASONABLE person believed that the original poster was INTENTIONALLY causing defamation to Pierre.

 

See, my idiot, there are four main elements of common law defamation:

 

1. Defendant made a defamatory statement,

2. Of or concerning the plaintiff,

3. Publication thereof by defendant to a third person, and

4. DAMAGE to the plaintiff's reputation.

 

Good luck proving element 4 to a judge or jury. No one would believe the title and joking context of the post that DID NOT say Pierre used steroids damaged his reputation. If you can't prove that, you're DONE! If you do prove that, you have to prove how much it hurt his reputation in dollar amount. Gee, how much do yall think this thread hurt Pierre's reputation in the public's eye? Oh yeah, NONE! File that freakin' suit paying probably at least $200 for a lawyer in Miami and see how much money Pierre losses.

 

Until you learn something about the legal system, just shut your mouth.

626722[/snapback]

 

 

Oh my poor little slow witted Crimson-Hole (Awesome combination might I add). I never said someone would win the case, I simply said someone could sue for libel for that. And seeing how this has gone on, it would be hard to say that it would be thrown out and laughed at as you said earlier. Find where I said someone could win this case, I said someone could be sued for saying something like that.

 

JP can afford a lawyer for a lawsuit or two, even if he doesn't get any money back, at least I hope he can, if not I think he needs a financial advisor.

 

Now for the damages. And this:

 

1. Defendant made a defamatory statement,

2. Of or concerning the plaintiff,

3. Publication thereof by defendant to a third person, and

4. DAMAGE to the plaintiff's reputation.

 

 

You are going to have to follow my logic here Crimson-Hole (Mmm I bet that smells good), so don't dumb out on me okay?

 

1. Is obvious. He insinuated JP was indicated for using steroids, and in the eyes of baseball using steroids makes you a cheat and that would be defaming you otherwise good name.

 

2. Is obvious too since it listed JP explicitly.

 

3. I read it, I am a third person and it was written on this web-site for the world to see.

 

4. Now here is where it gets tricky. In a case like this I think you can be a little unconventional. Get a group of people, people who don't know who JP is already. And you question them, ask them what they think of ball players, and how they think a ball player named Juan Pierre might be. Tell them about Juan and give some statistics, trying to explain it to them the best you can. Ask them if they think he is a good player. Then tell them he was indicated in a case and being investigated for steroids use because there is evidence he shoots up. Ask him their impression of him then. 9/10 times I bet his image gets worse in their minds, DAMAGE. Ask them then thinking he uses steroids if they would be less likely to buy a jersey or CD of his for themselves, their kid or someone else. I bet they would say they would. MORE DAMAGE.

 

Did you follow that Crimson-Hole?

 

Good. I am impressed; you get a snausage.

No thanks. Case closed.

"Juan Pierre admits to steroid use, Sought in BALCO trial."

Is this posting a joke? In which case Moderators should be fired and Poster banned.

626355[/snapback]

Yeah, ban him.

This argument is moot anyways, because you have to prove intent to cause harm to the party's reputation for you to win for the court to find in favor of the plantiff.