FTFA: Bennett ruled Snyder's lawsuit may proceed on two fronts - invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

The suits's still going forward on two other counts. He'll probably win those since the soldier wasn't a public figure and Pharkhead's antics are quite intentional. I doubt the jury will side with Westboro in that one. Removing the other charge may actually benefit the plantiff if/when the Phelps tries to appeal.

/where to I give to support the father's legal fund?

Dude seriously WTF: He'll probably win those since the soldier wasn't a public figure

but aren't soldiers, as employees of the government, considered public figures?

i honestly don't know the legal answer, but it seems arguable.

Not in the celebrity sense. You could argue that the senior leaders are, but the average enlisted soldier does not work in a capacity where they willingly seek the public spotlight.

Tabloids use that celebrity angle to shield themselves from defamation suits from actors on a regular basis. They argue that the actors ask for the fame, thus are open to negative commentary. Same with politicians. However, what is newsworthy about a deceased 20 year old kid and their family's grief? Nothing at all. Phelps uses their mourning as a platform to further his own goals and makes it into the news.

I think the judge is quietly setting the stage to ensure the trial can't be questioned on appeal. We'll see how it turns out. If Phelps loses, that will hopefully start building case law against him to end this crap.

Isn't this the problem with Phelps? He's a lawyer, and he's looking for someone to go toe to toe with him so he can use his lawyer voodoo on him?

Phelps and his demon children are the most disgusting people in the world.

It's amazing, isn't it? but maybe if the media would stop putting them on the news or even mentioning their existence during a fallen troops' funeral then they would quietly fade into the background. They feed off of any publicity, positive or negative. But what can we do? they'll hide behind the first amendement rights that are part of this "fag loving" nation, as they seem to call it.

UNC_Samurai: Isn't this the problem with Phelps? He's a lawyer, and he's looking for someone to go toe to toe with him so he can use his lawyer voodoo on him?

Was a lawyer. I've been told he was one of the best in the state, too...before being disbarred. His entire family is infested with lawyers. Here in Topeka, they're the big guns you call if you really farked up and need to get away with it.

It's people like this that drive me from being an agnostic to straight up wishing other religions besides Christianity are right just so I could see the look on Fred Phelps face before we all take the plunge down to Hades or Muslim hell or Xenu's S and M Dungeon.

.....as if a thousand lawyers all cried out at once.

ten years in the future, there will be a group of "free phelps" protesters. not because they agree with his message (hell, they can even publicly reject his message), but because of the first amendment rights violated in silencing it. they will be branded as homophobes and counter-protested.

FTFA:
"You think in 2007, that being accused of having sex with someone not your spouse, including premarital sex, you think that amounts to subjecting someone to public scorn?" Bennett asked the plaintiffs before dismissing the claim... Bennett denied the church's argument that the invasion of privacy claim should be dismissed, and he also refused to toss the emotional distress claim.

Its not like the guy threw out the entire case. In other news, being accused of adultery is not defamatory.

Asshattery does not cancel out douchebaggery.

the_chief: Asshattery does not cancel out douchebaggery.

Senator Daterape might disagree, he lost to President Douchebag.

I for one am looking forward to seeing the Phelps family sue someone for wrongful death and lose.

gc.c In other news, being accused of adultery is not defamatory.

Am I the only one who has trouble with that assertion? I mean, my first thought when I read the judge's statement was that the judge had an affair at some point, so he doesn't see the problem with that accusation.

Quite frankly, in a nation split 50/50 between social progressives and social conservatives, accusations of adultery can subject you to a lot of scorn.

Getting Phelps and company to leave funerals alone will not violate their first amendment rights. It's not defamation, because as the judge points out, no one takes them seriously. However, it is clearly intentional inflictment of emotional distress. Phelps can maintain his gay little website and say whatever he wants to his own congregation, but he has no legal footing to disrupt other peoples' funerals with his crap.

From the article: "We're out of sight, out of sound"

Why don't they just picket in their own homes? They won't disturb anyone that way

I dunno, Fred Phelps and his entire group are douches. I mean HUGE douches. Scum of the earth douches.

But calling someone a fag is not defamation. If this were to go forward, there would be a million lawsuits doing the same thing, and I bet our beloved Sen. Craig (R-andy for Buttsex) would be first in line.

The old man is on his way out, I might add. He's in terrible health last time I heard. What's better, we all know there are going to be protesters at his funeral. We'll see how his family likes it.

xBodo99: gc.c In other news, being accused of adultery is not defamatory.

Am I the only one who has trouble with that assertion? I mean, my first thought when I read the judge's statement was that the judge had an affair at some point, so he doesn't see the problem with that accusation.

Quite frankly, in a nation split 50/50 between social progressives and social conservatives, accusations of adultery can subject you to a lot of scorn.

Indeed, Clinton had quite a few public relation problems because of adultury.

OilTheBlade: The old man is on his way out, I might add. He's in terrible health last time I heard. What's better, we all know there are going to be protesters at his funeral. We'll see how his family likes it.

I will be awaiting that glorious day.

Can we kill the Phelps One™ yet? He, er....the deity he believes himself to be, is helping no one. Oh never mind, he's on his way out. Like Castro.

It's been said already ... but I will say it again only a single cause of action of a multiple cause of action was thrown out on a Motion to Dismiss. The case is moving forward. Unfortunately they are likely to lose on the others as well. On another note, no need to hope Phelps burns in hell or some such ... his hell is right here on earth.

If an errant swarm of meteorites were to crush Phelps and his family, I might just find religion.

Too stupid to figure out the link thingy but here is the address to the family's site where you can make donations: http://www.matthewsnyder.org/help.html

What are the chances Phelps is a homosexual?

wejash: If he was actually on fire and screaming, "I'm on fire!" I would not put down the blowtorch to check whether he was actually on fire.

My wall is now a lovely caramel color.

/The internet, Let me give you one.

OilTheBlade: The old man is on his way out, I might add. He's in terrible health last time I heard. What's better, we all know there are going to be protesters at his funeral. We'll see how his family likes it.

I can has Fark field trip?

I think that he crossed the line of free speech when he did hte research and brought out the divorice. I dont think he will be able to argue political or religious expression when he digs it on a personal level like this. He would have been on safer ground if he would have said "A solider died fighting for a god forsaken country" or something like that

what do you guys think?

What this man needs is gay people, like 50 or so homosexuals and lesbians making out, milling about their protest peacefully. Defeat them with hot, male on male and female on female kissing and snuggling!

The families at the funerals, of course, would have to be able to deal with man on man kissing, which sadly might be the deal breaker.
I've followed Fred with some interest, but its not clear to be whether or not gay folks have ever shown up to one of his funeral shindigs reciprocate in a protest capacity.

Fred Phelps and kin hate America because we're "Fag Enablers." What he fails to realize is that the freedoms intrinsic in the American way of life are the same freedoms that allow him to spout his vile diatribes.

/Send him to Iran; he'll be dead in a month

Actually the most fitting answer to Phelps death, when it comes, would be no one coming to the funeral. Just his little clan of freaks.

Barring that, hundreds lining the processional route, completely silent, turning their backs to the procession as it passes.

Oh, and I am totally going to shiat on his grave.

HBK: Oh, and I am totally going to shiat on his grave.

Why would you go and do that to a perfectly good turd? Now painting little pink triangles on the headstone....

fst_creeper: HBK: Oh, and I am totally going to shiat on his grave.

Why would you go and do that to a perfectly good turd? Now painting little pink triangles on the headstone....

Paint can be erased. Memories can't.

Or Option II:

Step 1: Wait for Phelps to die
Step 2: Dig up his body and pay some transient a couple thousand dollars to have gay necrophilia fag love with his corpse
Step 3: Post it on the internet
Step 4: Have the video make CNN, or at least VH1's Best Week Ever
Step 5: Laughter (Better than profit)

And old post by El_Camino_SS :



Fred Phelps does not believe what he is doing. This is a scam.

It's a business. They travel the country, set up wesites telling you exactly when they'll be there, and using the most inflammatory statements all over the place, just to get someone to violate their rights for profit. Then they sue the military, the police force that was to protect them, and everyone that is around them for money. This is a sham, and it is a trap to get people sued. Every member of his family is an attorney. Phelps does not break the law. What he does is try to make you break the law by trying to punch your sensibilities about everything you hold dear, and then sue you and everyone municipality around him to the max.

This is a scam.

Whether he believes his posters or not is irrelevent.
He's using this as a moneymaking scheme.
Lay one finger on him, do one thing that violates him, and he will sue you, and more importantly, the city, the police department, the US Military, and any private property owner he happens to be standing on to make money off of it.

Let's look at the ways he's trying to get you up in a tizzy to violate his civil rights for profit:
-He says G-d Hates Fags, G-d hates the US Govt, that G-d hates the US Military, G-d Hates you, and G-d justifies the killing of others.
Phelps knows that saying 'G-d' and 'Hate' in the same sentence gets people worked up. He knows that. He knows that people have a knee jerk reaction to that.
-He says that the US Govt and the United States are evil.
This is another hot button with people who love their country. It is intentional. It is designed to make you take a swing at him. He wants 50k USD from you. He wants a powerball winner to swing at him so he gets 100 million dollars. It's that simple.
-He goes after homosexuals, he goes after people who are making sacrifices. Phelps intentionally targets people that are being victimized, or good people doing their jobs to create more outrage. He kicks people when they're down. He does that so someone will come up and defend them. Then he will sue you.
-His boards are laminated on hardwood, because he pulls them out of trucks at least five times a week. He also puts them in bright colors for attention, and makes absolutely sure that you can read them at all time. He's phishing you. Everyone must know that.

The most telling tale about all of Phelp's behavior is the schedule he keeps, and the company he keeps as well. The parties sometimes split up and go to two seperate state funerals to maximize the profitability of them. There are, at maximum, twelve members to the party. They never stay more than thirty minutes (I assume they realize that someone will do something to them the MOMENT they come out of the vans, and really, after that, they get their camera shots to cause the outrage for the next stop, and then they move on) to maximize their profits, because time is money, and really, they're not interested in the message, because they're just interested in the lawsuit.

See? They don't believe this stuff. If they did, they wouldn't have come to Coretta Scott King's funeral. Because in their doctrine, they don't believe that G-d hates black people who tried to promote Christianity. So why were they there? They were there to make a buck when someone slipped up. They were there to petition the police department for a right to protest, and if they didn't get it, take them to court over it.

Basically, Phelps is playing the Ken Lay, Karl Rove, "Smartest Man in the Room" game where he is willing to do anything (if it be lying or stealing, or telling you God hates you) to make himself rich and powerful. This is his scheme, and admittedly, it's clever, but just downright evil to promote so much hatred in the world.

Tell all your friends about this.
This man is a con artist, and he's not a man of religion whatsoever.

After all, he makes everyone around him a lawyer.
That should tell you right now he is not anything

Who is he kidding? We all know that every fundie gay-basher actually has a rather "wide stance" on the issue.

Has anybody seen his brother around? Leon?

/cah-voss-E-A

NubianzWithAttitude: If an errant swarm of meteorites were to crush Phelps and his family, I might just find religion.

If I could redirect a certain spacecraft with an ion engine to push one in that direction to help you, and for once in all of humanity the only goddam thing I hear in the morning are frogs and birds and no one getting on my case about anything........And I would shower you in beer and make dinner for you. And I'm a guy.

Sigh, but the romantic simplistic life doesn't happen anymore. Run his ass over already.

If Bill Clinton had Fred Phelps as a "weasel word" adviser, he never would have been impeached.

The church claimed that Snyder's son, 20-year-old Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, who was killed in Iraq, was taught idolatry and adultery by his parents because they divorced.

1) Defamation, or slander (spoken), or libel (printed or written) torts generally have to have 3 elements: that the statement was false, that the statement was published to at least one third party, and that the accused negligently published the false statement. In some states, you have to prove that there was actual damage.

The defamation/libel would probably lose on the first prong - truth is an absolute defense to this class of torts. I'm not saying that this Marine's parents - either of them - are anything but decent, honorable people, but, the article mentions that they are divorced. If the nutjobs can show that even PROBABLY the parents, umm, engaged each other, or anyone else, while not married, the nutjobs win on their affirmative defense. I know, it sucks.

2) Invasion of privacy, there are also three "types," however, the family can very possibly (read, probably, especially with an inflammed jury) win under "disclosure of private facts." If you disclose private and embarrassing facts to the public about an individual, and the recipient (person that hears the facts - the third party) knows and understands exactly WHO the facts are in reference to, AND the disclosure serves no legitimate public interest, the person that made the statement has committed the tort of invasion of privacy. Not every jurisdiction will uphold claims of invasion of privacy, but it sounds like it's alive and well in Kansas.

Invasion of Privacy should be their winner.

3) IIED is also a tough one - not likely a winner here, but who knows? To win a judgment for IIED, you have to prove four things: 1) that the conduct was "extreme and outrageous" (yes, that is the term used). Extreme and outrageous conduct is explained as conduct that is so far beyond the bounds of normal human decency as to shock the conscience, and goes beyond "mere insults, indignities, threats, and annoyances.", 2) that the defendant intentionally or recklessly engaged in the conduct, 3) that the plaintiff suffered severe or extreme emotional distress, defined as "such severe and enduring emotional distress that no reasonable person in civilized society should be expected to endure it.", and 4) that the conduct was the direct (the term is actually "actual and proximate, but I ain't e'splainin' those - it's hard enough for a real torts professor) cause of the emotional distress.

It will likely be that the family would lose on the 3rd prong, in that it will probably be hard to show that they suffered emotional distress of "such a severe and enduring nature that NO reasonable person in civilized society should be expected to endure it." HOWEVER, again, SOME jurisdictions allow for another wrinkle. If it can be shown that the defendant knew or should have known that the plaintiff would be particularly susceptible to emotional distress as a result of the conduct due to a "mental condition or peculiarity" (such as dealing with the premature death of their son in combat), conduct can be considered extreme and outrageous even where in normal circumstances it would not be considered so. I have no idea if this flies in Kansas.

End of lesson. Nothing in this post is intended or expected to serve as legal advice or establish an attorney/client relationship. I am merely answering a pattern of general question in this thread on common legal principles.

HBK: Paint can be erased. Memories can't.

Your right on that score but I cannot help but think that any visible response is a mistake. I even retract my pink triangles. I think the only thing I can think of that would be an appropriate response would be to take the gay guy at work out to lunch in joyful celebration of the fact that the world is lighter one first class tool.

fst_creeper: HBK: Paint can be erased. Memories can't.

Your right on that score but I cannot help but think that any visible response is a mistake. I even retract my pink triangles. I think the only thing I can think of that would be an appropriate response would be to take the gay guy at work out to lunch in joyful celebration of the fact that the world is lighter one first class tool.

Yeah, it is possible that Phelps is a troll of Whoopty Woo Something Something proportions.

At his funeral, a dozen gay transvestites need to attend, and declare that they were his lover at different times.

kingMountain: Dude seriously WTF: He'll probably win those since the soldier wasn't a public figure

but aren't soldiers, as employees of the government, considered public figures?

i honestly don't know the legal answer, but it seems arguable.

Sure, just like your average mail man/woman/postal person.

I mostly hate this group because they forced me to agree with Sean Hannity. DAMN YOU FRED PHELPS!