Welcome To aBlackWeb

Register

Kyle Rittenhouse Trial (Jacob Blake Protest Shooting)

Bow to Royalty said:
Damn, y'all NEED better news sources and don't know it. Or maybe you have more happiness being ignorant...I dunno.

He didn't drive hours. 30-ish mins maybe?

So far he drove hours to kill 2 black people. .. but ya'll still don't get why people need more reliable sources for their news.
Click to expand...
I guess he gonna sue me now too because I said he drove hours. You’re sure as hell invested in protecting Kyle on here…
 
5th Letter said:
I guess he gonna sue me now too because I said he drove hours. You’re sure as hell invested in protecting Kyle on here…
Click to expand...

You're not a news outlet. The problem is someone said it, and you're simple so you've gone months or years believing it.

Y'all embrace ignorance too much. You think something that's objectively wrong. When corrected, you go into attack mode to maintain your ignorance.

I see why you don't want more accurate news. You don't want to be informed, you want to hear a narrative you like. You're the same as Fox News fanatics, but from the opposite viewpoints.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
You're not a news outlet. The problem is someone said it, and you're simple so you've gone months or years believing it.

Y'all embrace ignorance too much. You think something that's objectively wrong. When corrected, you go into attack mode to maintain your ignorance.

I see why you don't want more accurate news. You don't want to be informed, you want to hear a narrative you like. You're the same as Fox News fanatics, but from the opposite viewpoints.
Click to expand...
You got me there he didn’t drive hours…..
 
Bow to Royalty said:
Damn, y'all NEED better news sources and don't know it. Or maybe you have more happiness being ignorant...I dunno.

He didn't drive hours. 30-ish mins maybe?

So far he drove hours to kill 2 black people. .. but ya'll still don't get why people need more reliable sources for their news.
Click to expand...

Why you harping so damn hard on dude saying black people like it wasn’t a mistake that’s weird af bro
 
Buddy need to sit down and enjoy the fact he still free after catching them bodies

Suing news outlets for defamation, sounds very white and somehow WI will bend the law for him also
 
Bow to Royalty said:
Still support this. Everyone should do this.
Click to expand...

He doesn't have much of a case. If he does then OJ would've sued people decades ago and would still be suing for the things said and still said about him.

Also no news outlets said he killed 2 Black people. That was people on social media which he ain't about to individually sue people for tweets with misinformation. If he did then he'd sue many outlets that supported him too.
 
For like the 5th time. Y'all are stuck on the Rittenhouse part too much. I already said I don't care about him. I just care about accurate news stories. I said EVERYONE should sue for defamation if they think news lied on them, so we can get some accountability.

I think I was in here before he mentioned suing, talking about needing more credible news. The news should inform people, not persuade people or cater to people.

Somehow that's being contrarian though.
 
BlackRain said:
He doesn't have much of a case. If he does then OJ would've sued people decades ago and would still be suing for the things said and still said about him.
Click to expand...

YES! OJ should have sued them. He got wise to the game late. He settled a defamation suit last year against a casino whose workers were telling fake stories to news outlets.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
YES! OJ should have sued them. He got wise to the game late. He settled a defamation suit last year against a casino whose workers were telling fake stories to news outlets.
Click to expand...

Experts in the field of defamation and First Amendment law tell Rolling Stone that making claims against media organizations or people offering opinionated commentary on news events is much different than suing someone for defamation in a so-called he said/she said case, like with Depp-Heard.

“For someone like Kyle Rittenhouse — where at this point, at least, the video is known, the narrative is known — how could someone possibly be confused as to what happened? People will watch that same video and apply whatever motivated reasoning they have to it,” Novack says. “Me saying that, ‘He’s a murderer’ — I’m not saying it, but if I were to — we call that in the law ‘an opinion based on disclosed facts.’ I’m not harboring secret knowledge. I’m saying, ‘I watched the videos and I consider him a murderer.’”

Opinion is an “absolute bar to liability” if the opinion “is founded on facts that we can all agree upon,” the lawyer says. That’s why people can still call O.J. Simpson a “killer,” even though he was acquitted in criminal court.

“[Rittenhouse] wants to say he was exonerated, right? And that’s not technically true. He was found not guilty by virtue of reasonable doubt. And reasonable doubt is in the eye of the beholder,” Novack says. “The jury in his case could have felt it was 90 percent likely that he had the requisite mental state, intent to harm, but nonetheless they felt that the prosecution’s case wasn’t a slam dunk. We can all watch the video. Much of his trial was televised. We can watch his testimony and just decide if he’s credible.”

California lawyer Michael Overing, another expert in libel and defamation law, says the Depp-Heard verdict is different from what Rittenhouse is claiming because it hinged on what allegedly happened between Depp and his ex-wife Amber Heard “behind closed doors for the most part.”

“In the case of Rittenhouse, once you’ve got a public event and it becomes press-related, the First Amendment kicks in and is going to give a lot more power to the press to defend itself. It’s that ability to rely upon our First Amendment protections to report upon newsworthy events and to show the video and make commentary about the video because that’s what the news does,” Overing says. “The protection for what is news is exceptionally broad, so you have a lot more protection when you’re reporting upon a news event because there is community interest in the event as it is unfurling.”
Click to expand...

TLDR: He would lose and lose badly
 
BlackRain said:
TLDR: He would lose and lose badly
Click to expand...

Good read. I can see the defense in continuing to call him a killer. I don't think they've released a lot of detail, but one person I've seen them talk about suing is Zuckerberg. I guess Facebook referred to it as a mass murder (and him a mass murderer), which was factually wrong and not a matter of opinion. And that they allegedly were censoring people on FB that were disputing it.
 
SMH @ black people not being able to stay on code

like how white people do for cac (I mean Kyle) Rittenhouse🙁
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top