Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Raw Story)   Abdulrahman Alharbi files a $20 million defamation suit against Glenn Beck and his media company because Beck repeatedly accused him of being responsible for the Boston Marathon attacks, when in fact he was actually a victim of them   (rawstory.com) divider line 138
    More: Spiffy, Abdulrahman Alharbi, Boston Marathon, Alharbi, Muslims, Mercury Radio Arts, defamations, child murder  
•       •       •

9619 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Mar 2014 at 4:56 PM (48 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



138 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-31 05:37:56 PM  

pute kisses like a man: malice is a term of art.  it's not precisely a psychological determination, it's a word used that has a legal description.  generally, malice in the defamation context can be shown by knowingly false statements, or statements made with a reckless disregard for the truth.

the reason they allege 'with malice' is because that's a requirement to overcome 1st amendment protections, because this arises out of a public concern/issue.


You don't have to prove malice in a libel suit involving a defamed private person, only with public figures. For libel to proved in this case, all they have to show is that Beck made a false, defamatory statement. No need to prove anything else. The "actual malice' standard comes from New York Times. v. Sullivan, where the paper successfully defended itself because Sullivan was a public figure, even though they printed false, defamatory things about him.

Beck's lawyers will probably argue that since they didn't name the plaintiff, he wasn't defamed. They're gonna lose; the guy was widely identified by name in news accounts, and Beck's listeners knew exactly who he was talking about. It's just a matter of how much the case will settle for at this point.
 
2014-03-31 05:39:01 PM  

DeathByGeekSquad: He should widen the case, it wasn't just Glenn Beck.  During the initial hours, names were flying everywhere - and articles were being released with those names because everyone was trying to get 'the scoop'.  They later edited out the names, and blamed social media.


True...Beck was one of many tagging this guy as guilty. Beck was one of a myriad in media doing this

Which means this Saudi national does not have a slam dunk case...and looks like Beck is singled out because he has more $$$ and listeners/viewers
 
2014-03-31 05:40:30 PM  

gunslinger_RG: Is it wrong that I would love to see this guy take all the money he gets and post a youtube video of him rolling around in it, a la Eric Cartman, while going; "mmmm Beck's money mmmmm Beck's money aaaahhh Beck's Money".  I'd buy that for a dollar!


I see Glenn Beck as more of a grown up Eric Cartman, and would like it to be more like the end of Cartmanland, where he's financially ruined and facing mounting lawsuits, broke and screaming to the heavens about how God is smiting him.
 
2014-03-31 05:41:33 PM  

Silverstaff: gunslinger_RG: Is it wrong that I would love to see this guy take all the money he gets and post a youtube video of him rolling around in it, a la Eric Cartman, while going; "mmmm Beck's money mmmmm Beck's money aaaahhh Beck's Money".  I'd buy that for a dollar!

I see Glenn Beck as more of a grown up Eric Cartman, and would like it to be more like the end of Cartmanland, where he's financially ruined and facing mounting lawsuits, broke and screaming to the heavens about how God is smiting him.


As long as someone gets to pepper spray him at the end, I'll be very happy with this outcome.
 
2014-03-31 05:44:07 PM  
"We have information on who this man is, (and) we know he is a very bad, bad, bad man."


Clearly actionable.   Also,much worse than saying Romney never pays his taxes.
 
2014-03-31 05:45:01 PM  

FloridaFarkTag: DeathByGeekSquad: He should widen the case, it wasn't just Glenn Beck.  During the initial hours, names were flying everywhere - and articles were being released with those names because everyone was trying to get 'the scoop'.  They later edited out the names, and blamed social media.

True...Beck was one of many tagging this guy as guilty. Beck was one of a myriad in media doing this

Which means this Saudi national does not have a slam dunk case...and looks like Beck is singled out because he has more $$$ and listeners/viewers


That doesn't really matter. If news outlets reported accurately that the guy was questioned by police, that's not libelous. They could even say he was a suspect (everybody was a suspect). Beck went WAY beyond that, and made flat statements that the Saudi was a bad guy, and questioned the motivations behind his not being arrested. Nobody anywhere else went that far, although some Fox pundits probably came the closest in their Weeners.
 
2014-03-31 05:45:20 PM  

LazyMedia: Beck's lawyers will probably argue that since they didn't name the plaintiff, he wasn't defamed. They're gonna lose; the guy was widely identified by name in news accounts, and Beck's listeners knew exactly who he was talking about. It's just a matter of how much the case will settle for at this point.


Part of me wonders whether the Beckerheads will try to litigate this thing in public - make it about MAH FREEDUMBS AND FIRST AMENDMENTS and get Glenn all lubed up with tears while making appearances with that Duck feller what made liberals sad for being Christian in public.

See if that can't get him back to Fox.

// or relevancy
 
2014-03-31 05:50:57 PM  

Dr Dreidel: LazyMedia: Beck's lawyers will probably argue that since they didn't name the plaintiff, he wasn't defamed. They're gonna lose; the guy was widely identified by name in news accounts, and Beck's listeners knew exactly who he was talking about. It's just a matter of how much the case will settle for at this point.

Part of me wonders whether the Beckerheads will try to litigate this thing in public - make it about MAH FREEDUMBS AND FIRST AMENDMENTS and get Glenn all lubed up with tears while making appearances with that Duck feller what made liberals sad for being Christian in public.

See if that can't get him back to Fox.

// or relevancy


I doubt his lawyers would let him do it, as that would just restate the libel. He's going to have to Paula Deen it a little to minimize the amount he's going to have to pay.

/Speaking of people who should have settled before being deposed.
 
2014-03-31 05:52:27 PM  

SquiggsIN: I've started to question whether Beck even believes what he says.  How much money would it take one of you to completely sell out?  I'm guessing Beck probably has more in offshore accounts than it'd take most of us to make a deal with the devil, so to speak.


He is an entertainer if anything.
 
2014-03-31 05:53:36 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com

Unfortunately, it settles out of court with a non-disclosure so we'll never know exactly how big an extra hole Beck gets ripped.
 
2014-03-31 05:54:53 PM  

FloridaFarkTag: DeathByGeekSquad: He should widen the case, it wasn't just Glenn Beck.  During the initial hours, names were flying everywhere - and articles were being released with those names because everyone was trying to get 'the scoop'.  They later edited out the names, and blamed social media.

True...Beck was one of many tagging this guy as guilty a suspect. Beck was one of a myriad in media doing this

Which means this Saudi national does not have a slam dunk case...and looks like Beck is singled out because he has more $$$ and listeners/viewers outside of the derposphere, calling someone guilty and lying about having supporting evidence is not the same as calling someone a "suspect" or "person of interest."


FTFT. Your hero went full potato again, but this time someone's doing something about it.
 
2014-03-31 05:55:07 PM  
And this is why there are black members of the LDS priesthood now. Talking nasty about people and treating them badly is all fine and good. Until they lawyer up.

Enjoy writing the retraction Glenn.

You might want to read up on Jerry Falwell's apology for blaming the queers for the 9/11 attacks. You're going to end up having to issue a similar apology.
 
2014-03-31 05:57:11 PM  
Please go to public trial...
Please pretty please go to public trial....

With sugar on top?
 
2014-03-31 05:57:44 PM  

MayoSlather: A clever ruse by Beck to deflect attention away from the girls he's raped and murdered. If only I had a chalkboard I could better illustrate his dastardly plot.


It makes me wonder if Beck himself had something to do with the Boston bombing, since he worked so hard to exploit it for his own aggrandizement after it happened.

I'm not saying whether or not Glen Beck financed or otherwise played an active role in the Boston bombing. I'm just asking the question. Did he finance or otherwise play an active role in the Boston bombing? He certainly had motive to.

So far, he hasn't answered. It's almost like he's afraid to answer it.

But he of all people should know the folly of not issuing a prompt denial. As your post proves, questions about the young girl he may have raped and murdered in 1992 still haven't gone away.

He might--might--be afraid of losing his credibility should he issue a denial, only to have someone who has been holding back on unassailable evidence come out and prove his denial false.

Is guilt then a fair inference from his refusal to answer questions about the young girl he may have raped and murdered in 1992, and about his financial or otherwise active involvement in the Boston bombing?

Is Glenn Beck a rapist and a terrorist? Why won't he just say "no" and clear the air?
 
2014-03-31 05:59:04 PM  

SquiggsIN: Jument: Wait, isn't he that guy who raped and killed that girl a few years back?

[img.fark.net image 534x594]

Are these the usual suspects?


I just realized that Bob Saget should totally play a serial killer on Hannibal.
 
2014-03-31 06:00:14 PM  
img.fark.net

If there is a King of that Commonweath of Morons it's Glenn Beck.
 
2014-03-31 06:00:49 PM  
Well, what do y'all expect when an idiot starts his mouth going before his brain is in gear?
 
2014-03-31 06:01:57 PM  

TheShavingofOccam123: And this is why there are black members of the LDS priesthood now. Talking nasty about people and treating them badly is all fine and good. Until they lawyer up.

Enjoy writing the retraction Glenn.

You might want to read up on Jerry Falwell's apology for blaming the queers for the 9/11 attacks. You're going to end up having to issue a similar apology.


I'm still furious about how gay marriage has kept solar energy away from us (NSFW language).
 
2014-03-31 06:03:46 PM  
Ok so let's say for the sake of arguing that this guy wasn't involved in the boston attack... Once he had Glenn beck's millions, what's to stop him from using that money to finance even bigger terrorist attacks?
 
2014-03-31 06:05:02 PM  

SquiggsIN: I've started to question whether Beck even believes what he says.  How much money would it take one of you to completely sell out?  I'm guessing Beck probably has more in offshore accounts than it'd take most of us to make a deal with the devil, so to speak.


He probably has three times as much money hidden away as the the money the devil would have to pay to let Rosie O'Donnell sodomize them with a strap-on in a room with non-matching drapes and flooring while Billy Ray Cyrus blares through nearby speakers at full volume.  (with a hobo recording it at a bad angle the whole time)
 
2014-03-31 06:06:33 PM  

K3rmy: SquiggsIN: I've started to question whether Beck even believes what he says.  How much money would it take one of you to completely sell out?  I'm guessing Beck probably has more in offshore accounts than it'd take most of us to make a deal with the devil, so to speak.

He probably has three times as much money hidden away as the the money the devil would have to pay all of the gays in San Francisco to let Rosie O'Donnell sodomize them with a strap-on in a room with non-matching drapes and flooring while Billy Ray Cyrus blares through nearby speakers at full volume.  (with a hobo recording it at a bad angle the whole time)


Forgot that part.

No matter.

Still only 6 dollars.
 
2014-03-31 06:07:30 PM  
img.fark.net

==

img.fark.net
 
2014-03-31 06:08:52 PM  

cman: Beck is a moran.

However, since I like to stoke flames, let me take on a different side.

He could argue that it wasnt made in malice that it was made due to emotional distress. That day reminded us a lot of 9/11.


You can't accuse someone of a horrible crime if it's not true. This is what defamation laws were made for. Did that kid that was fall accused of the new town shooting everywhere up because he's due for a serious payday from multiple news stations
 
2014-03-31 06:09:14 PM  
I hope Redditt gets sued, then, too
 
2014-03-31 06:10:35 PM  

LazyMedia: pute kisses like a man: malice is a term of art.  it's not precisely a psychological determination, it's a word used that has a legal description.  generally, malice in the defamation context can be shown by knowingly false statements, or statements made with a reckless disregard for the truth.

the reason they allege 'with malice' is because that's a requirement to overcome 1st amendment protections, because this arises out of a public concern/issue.

You don't have to prove malice in a libel suit involving a defamed private person, only with public figures. For libel to proved in this case, all they have to show is that Beck made a false, defamatory statement. No need to prove anything else. The "actual malice' standard comes from New York Times. v. Sullivan, where the paper successfully defended itself because Sullivan was a public figure, even though they printed false, defamatory things about him.

Beck's lawyers will probably argue that since they didn't name the plaintiff, he wasn't defamed. They're gonna lose; the guy was widely identified by name in news accounts, and Beck's listeners knew exactly who he was talking about. It's just a matter of how much the case will settle for at this point.


i think it's closer than you think.  while he is a private figure, it's on a public issue.  in my hypothetical and uninformed opinion, i would argue and likely concede that this is a private actor/private issue, but i can also see the argument that this was an issue of public concern. when private actors are involved in issues of public concern, then the malice standard, as if it were a public actor, applies.

either way, they probably plead both alternatively.
 
2014-03-31 06:13:02 PM  

Baz744: As your post proves, questions about the young girl he may have raped and murdered in 1992 still haven't gone away.


Wait, there was a Glenn Beck rape/murder in 1992 in addition to the Glenn Beck rape/murder in 1990?
Does Glenn Beck give in to an uncontrollable compulsion to rape and murder little girls in every even-numbered year?

I'm just asking questions!
 
2014-03-31 06:13:56 PM  

Warlordtrooper: cman: Beck is a moran.

However, since I like to stoke flames, let me take on a different side.

He could argue that it wasnt made in malice that it was made due to emotional distress. That day reminded us a lot of 9/11.

You can't accuse someone of a horrible crime if it's not true. This is what defamation laws were made for. Did that kid that was fall accused of the new town shooting everywhere up because he's due for a serious payday from multiple news stations


Journalists can, however, repeat a false accusation if the police or prosecutors make it; that's called "privilege." That's how the Atlanta Journal-Constitution avoided losing a libel case against Richard Jewell. All they did was say he was the lead suspect (and he was; the cops just screwed up the case). The networks that paid through the nose to Jewell libeled him in commentary; if they'd stuck to the facts followed by "police said," they'd have been OK.
 
2014-03-31 06:15:27 PM  

Gyrfalcon: All Beck's lawyer has to do is say if this kid hadn't written the Necronomicon, he'd be fine today.


+1000 for the Lovecraft reference.
 
2014-03-31 06:19:52 PM  

Bith Set Me Up: It's sickening how Pavlovian it is assuming a Middle Easterner and/or Muslim is behind every major crime. When Timothy McVeigh bombed Oklahoma City, everybody assumed a Middle Easterner was responsible, with the FBI calling for Arabic translators.

Our whole society has been taught to only view Middle Easterners and Muslims with distrust and scorn. That needs to change.

We're with you, Mr. Alharbi. Break Beck's ass into pieces.


During the Boston bombing, the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted Times Square bombing, the Total Fark left were engaging in circle jokes, praying to their large government god that it was a white Tea Bagger.
 
2014-03-31 06:21:32 PM  

pute kisses like a man: LazyMedia: pute kisses like a man: malice is a term of art.  it's not precisely a psychological determination, it's a word used that has a legal description.  generally, malice in the defamation context can be shown by knowingly false statements, or statements made with a reckless disregard for the truth.

the reason they allege 'with malice' is because that's a requirement to overcome 1st amendment protections, because this arises out of a public concern/issue.

You don't have to prove malice in a libel suit involving a defamed private person, only with public figures. For libel to proved in this case, all they have to show is that Beck made a false, defamatory statement. No need to prove anything else. The "actual malice' standard comes from New York Times. v. Sullivan, where the paper successfully defended itself because Sullivan was a public figure, even though they printed false, defamatory things about him.

Beck's lawyers will probably argue that since they didn't name the plaintiff, he wasn't defamed. They're gonna lose; the guy was widely identified by name in news accounts, and Beck's listeners knew exactly who he was talking about. It's just a matter of how much the case will settle for at this point.

i think it's closer than you think.  while he is a private figure, it's on a public issue.  in my hypothetical and uninformed opinion, i would argue and likely concede that this is a private actor/private issue, but i can also see the argument that this was an issue of public concern. when private actors are involved in issues of public concern, then the malice standard, as if it were a public actor, applies.

either way, they probably plead both alternatively.


No, you're wrong about that. I took a class on this in college, and in brushing up, I find I'm still correct about actual malice. A private person does not become a public figure for a single instance unless "they have thrust themselves to the forefront of particular controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved." Simply being an innocent bystander, or even a police suspect, in a case of great public interest doesn't make you a public figure, and thus you don't have to overcome the actual malice standard for false, defamatory statements like the ones Beck made.

What you're thinking of, I think, is invasion of privacy. Individuals who are involved in matters of public concern do lose some of their privacy rights. I can't take a picture of you standing in your front yard and run it in the paper, but I can if your house is on fire.
 
2014-03-31 06:21:59 PM  

Nemo's Brother: attempted Times Square bombing


Little known fact: the reason that was an "attempted" bombing, and not just a "bombing," was because an alert Muslim citizen saw it and alerted the authorities.
 
2014-03-31 06:22:19 PM  
hurr I liek Glenn Beck
Glenn Beck is pretty entertaining
durr
 
2014-03-31 06:24:43 PM  

Nemo's Brother: Bith Set Me Up: It's sickening how Pavlovian it is assuming a Middle Easterner and/or Muslim is behind every major crime. When Timothy McVeigh bombed Oklahoma City, everybody assumed a Middle Easterner was responsible, with the FBI calling for Arabic translators.

Our whole society has been taught to only view Middle Easterners and Muslims with distrust and scorn. That needs to change.

We're with you, Mr. Alharbi. Break Beck's ass into pieces.

During the Boston bombing, the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted Times Square bombing, the Total Fark left were engaging in circle jokes, praying to their large government god that it was a white Tea Bagger.


The far left hoped it was a Caucasian. The far right hoped it was a Middle Easterner and/or Muslim. In the end, they each got a bit of both.
 
2014-03-31 06:29:41 PM  
cman [TotalFark]
2014-03-31 03:34:28 PM


Beck is a moran.

Agreed. So are the 4dozen total farkers who swore it was done by the Tea Party and even bet that it would not be a member of islam.
 
2014-03-31 06:34:17 PM  

LazyMedia: I can't take a picture of you standing in your front yard and run it in the paper, but I can if your house is on fire.


Would you at least tell him his house is on fire? I mean come on. Dude's house is burning down behind him. He seems oblivious. And you just snap a pic and move on?
 
2014-03-31 06:44:22 PM  
And Popehat has just sided with Glenn Beck in protecting his constitutionally protected right to call this guy a terrorist.

/I'm sorry, I'm just wondering why Ken is backing Mark Steyn of NRO on a lawsuit from Michael Mann over climate change, despite the fact that Steyn is now acting as his own attorney, likely to use the resulting loss as proof the government is in on the "warmer" conspiracy...
//No, I really don't understand it...he's even linked to a fund supporting Steyn. Thus the joke.
 
2014-03-31 06:56:22 PM  
Please sue Glenn Beck back into obscurity. Please.
 
2014-03-31 06:56:30 PM  

Nemo's Brother: During the Boston bombing, the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted Times Square bombing, the Total Fark left were engaging in circle jokes, praying to their large government god that it was a white Tea Bagger.


Which of course is bunk, because TINSTAAVC.
 
2014-03-31 06:57:07 PM  
(by the way, "circle jokes"?  nice!)
 
2014-03-31 07:00:39 PM  
Wow, If that's worth $20 mil, then NBC's edited police evidence will probably net  Zimmerman a couple hundred million.
 
2014-03-31 07:07:27 PM  

Pants full of macaroni!!: Nemo's Brother: During the Boston bombing, the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted Times Square bombing, the Total Fark left were engaging in circle jokes, praying to their large government god that it was a white Tea Bagger.

Which of course is bunk, because TINSTAAVC.


TINSTAAVC?
 
2014-03-31 07:10:37 PM  

LazyMedia: pute kisses like a man: LazyMedia: pute kisses like a man: malice is a term of art.  it's not precisely a psychological determination, it's a word used that has a legal description.  generally, malice in the defamation context can be shown by knowingly false statements, or statements made with a reckless disregard for the truth.

the reason they allege 'with malice' is because that's a requirement to overcome 1st amendment protections, because this arises out of a public concern/issue.

You don't have to prove malice in a libel suit involving a defamed private person, only with public figures. For libel to proved in this case, all they have to show is that Beck made a false, defamatory statement. No need to prove anything else. The "actual malice' standard comes from New York Times. v. Sullivan, where the paper successfully defended itself because Sullivan was a public figure, even though they printed false, defamatory things about him.

Beck's lawyers will probably argue that since they didn't name the plaintiff, he wasn't defamed. They're gonna lose; the guy was widely identified by name in news accounts, and Beck's listeners knew exactly who he was talking about. It's just a matter of how much the case will settle for at this point.

i think it's closer than you think.  while he is a private figure, it's on a public issue.  in my hypothetical and uninformed opinion, i would argue and likely concede that this is a private actor/private issue, but i can also see the argument that this was an issue of public concern. when private actors are involved in issues of public concern, then the malice standard, as if it were a public actor, applies.

either way, they probably plead both alternatively.

No, you're wrong about that. I took a class on this in college, and in brushing up, I find I'm still correct about actual malice. A private person does not become a public figure for a single instance unless "they have thrust themselves to the forefront of particular controve ...


You actually can become an involuntary public figure if you are a part of something particularly notorious and newsworthy.
 
2014-03-31 07:11:07 PM  

MayoSlather: A clever ruse by Beck to deflect attention away from the girls he's raped and murdered. If only I had a chalkboard I could better illustrate his dastardly plot.


If only i had a chalk board so that I could illustrate every time you've stated this tired, old, and debunked accusation. Grow up. Seriously.
 
2014-03-31 07:11:14 PM  
When it's absolutely, positively, indefensible...

img0.joyreactor.cc
 
2014-03-31 07:11:19 PM  
I'm dipping my Glen Beck Doll in a beaker of urine right now.
 
2014-03-31 07:15:12 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Wow, If that's worth $20 mil, then NBC's edited police evidence will probably net  Zimmerman a couple hundred million.


1/10, but only because I'm biting.

If only NBC had corrected the false reporting, apologized, and fired the responsible sound engineer, they could have minimized or eliminated entirely the possibility of a significant punitive damage award.
 
2014-03-31 07:15:37 PM  

machoprogrammer: TINSTAAVC?


Took me a moment to work it out. I think he's saying "There Is No Such Thing As A Violent Christian", which I do believe has been falsely claimed by right-wingers more than once.
 
2014-03-31 07:17:11 PM  

Silverstaff: gunslinger_RG: Is it wrong that I would love to see this guy take all the money he gets and post a youtube video of him rolling around in it, a la Eric Cartman, while going; "mmmm Beck's money mmmmm Beck's money aaaahhh Beck's Money".  I'd buy that for a dollar!

I see Glenn Beck as more of a grown up Eric Cartman, and would like it to be more like the end of Cartmanland, where he's financially ruined and facing mounting lawsuits, broke and screaming to the heavens about how God is smiting him.


img.fark.net
 
2014-03-31 07:19:06 PM  

TerminalEchoes: MayoSlather: A clever ruse by Beck to deflect attention away from the girls he's raped and murdered. If only I had a chalkboard I could better illustrate his dastardly plot.

If only i had a chalk board so that I could illustrate every time you've stated this tired, old, and debunked accusation. Grow up. Seriously.


Debunked?

How could it be debunked when Glenn Beck won't even deny it?
 
2014-03-31 07:21:13 PM  

Rhaab: machoprogrammer: TINSTAAVC?

Took me a moment to work it out. I think he's saying "There Is No Such Thing As A Violent Christian", which I do believe has been falsely claimed by right-wingers more than once.


Ohh. Eric Rudolph would disprove that easily
 
Displayed 50 of 138 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report