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.

(Talking Points Memo)   Boston Bombing victim, accused by Glenn Beck of being a terrorist, can't sue for libel because he's a public figure, says Glenn Beck, who made him a public figure by accusing him of terrorism   (talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 122
    More: Dumbass, Douglas A-20 Havoc, Abdulrahman Alharbi  
•       •       •

3122 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Jul 2014 at 6:40 PM (12 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-24 03:47:36 PM  
I found this very old picture of Beck:

www.historiann.com
 
2014-07-24 04:07:13 PM  
Beck will likely lose.

In addition to all the other elements of defamation, even if Abdulrahman Alharbi was an involuntary public figure (and turned into one by Beck), then all that changes is that the plaintiff must show that Beck spoke with "actual malice." That is, he either knew what he is saying is false or he recklessly made the statement without any regard for the truth of it (or, alternatively, he suspected what he was saying wasn't quite true).

Considering that when Beck made the allegations against Abdulrahman Alharbi, the FBI already had identified the Tsarnaev brothers as the suspects, I'd imagine that Abdulrahman Alharbi will be able to show that Beck was at least reckless, if he didn't know what he was saying was false.

Here are some samples of what he said:

Beck, however, had suspicions. The radio host urged the U.S. government to release information on Alharbi or Beck would "expose" him. "Let me send this message very clear," said Beck, who left Fox News in 2011. "We know who this Saudi national is.... We know who this man is and, listen to me carefully, we know he is a very bad, bad, bad man."

Beck continued days later: "While the media continues to look at what the causes were [behind] these two guys, there are, at this hour, three people involved," he said, alleging the U.S. government had "tagged" Alharbi as a "proven terrorist."

The broadcaster eventually called Alharbi an al-Qaeda "control agent" and the "money man" behind the attacks. "You know who the Saudi is?" Beck asked. "He's the money man. He's the guy who paid for it."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/04/01/glenn-b ec k-sued-for-defamation-after-calling-victim-of-boston-marathon-bombings -the-money-man-behind-attack/
 
2014-07-24 04:50:08 PM  
Oh, so since Glenn Beck is also a public figure, he can't punish me for publishing a list of questions about his actions in 1990, right?

Just asking questions here...
 
2014-07-24 05:00:44 PM  
Beck's legal team contends that the conservative radio host... is actually the real victim in this case.

Wait. A conservative with a victimhood complex who tries to blame others for his own stupid actions? I am shocked.

But then I am also shocked that the sun comes up in the East every day. How does it do that?!?
 
2014-07-24 05:04:04 PM  
Go f*ck yourself Glenn, you slimy piece of sh*t.
 
2014-07-24 05:04:24 PM  

RexTalionis: Beck will likely lose.

In addition to all the other elements of defamation, even if Abdulrahman Alharbi was an involuntary public figure (and turned into one by Beck), then all that changes is that the plaintiff must show that Beck spoke with "actual malice." That is, he either knew what he is saying is false or he recklessly made the statement without any regard for the truth of it (or, alternatively, he suspected what he was saying wasn't quite true).

Considering that when Beck made the allegations against Abdulrahman Alharbi, the FBI already had identified the Tsarnaev brothers as the suspects, I'd imagine that Abdulrahman Alharbi will be able to show that Beck was at least reckless, if he didn't know what he was saying was false.

Here are some samples of what he said:

Beck, however, had suspicions. The radio host urged the U.S. government to release information on Alharbi or Beck would "expose" him. "Let me send this message very clear," said Beck, who left Fox News in 2011. "We know who this Saudi national is.... We know who this man is and, listen to me carefully, we know he is a very bad, bad, bad man."

Beck continued days later: "While the media continues to look at what the causes were [behind] these two guys, there are, at this hour, three people involved," he said, alleging the U.S. government had "tagged" Alharbi as a "proven terrorist."

The broadcaster eventually called Alharbi an al-Qaeda "control agent" and the "money man" behind the attacks. "You know who the Saudi is?" Beck asked. "He's the money man. He's the guy who paid for it."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/04/01/glenn-b ec k-sued-for-defamation-after-calling-victim-of-boston-marathon-bombings -the-money-man-behind-attack/


IIR defamation law C, the fact that the accusation is of criminal activity means malice is presumed, albeit subject to rebuttal.

So yeah. Beck better start writing that check.
 
2014-07-24 05:15:55 PM  

gilgigamesh: IIR defamation law C, the fact that the accusation is of criminal activity means malice is presumed, albeit subject to rebuttal.

So yeah. Beck better start writing that check.


Yeah, defamation per se, I had forgotten about it.

Beck's screwed.
 
2014-07-24 05:29:13 PM  

RexTalionis: gilgigamesh: IIR defamation law C, the fact that the accusation is of criminal activity means malice is presumed, albeit subject to rebuttal.

So yeah. Beck better start writing that check.

Yeah, defamation per se, I had forgotten about it.

Beck's screwed.


Makes you wonder why his lawyers are bothering with this retarded public figure defense. Might as well allege parody if you're going in that half-baked.
 
2014-07-24 05:32:39 PM  

gilgigamesh: RexTalionis: gilgigamesh: IIR defamation law C, the fact that the accusation is of criminal activity means malice is presumed, albeit subject to rebuttal.

So yeah. Beck better start writing that check.

Yeah, defamation per se, I had forgotten about it.

Beck's screwed.

Makes you wonder why his lawyers are bothering with this retarded public figure defense. Might as well allege parody if you're going in that half-baked.


Gotta argue something.
 
2014-07-24 06:38:19 PM  

RexTalionis: Beck will likely lose.


You say that, but then... you would say that, wouldn't you? What are you trying to hide?! And don't try to deny it - we're on to you!
 
2014-07-24 06:46:28 PM  

gilgigamesh: Beck's legal team contends that the conservative radio host... is actually the real victim in this case.

Wait. A conservative with a victimhood complex who tries to blame others for his own stupid actions? I am shocked.

But then I am also shocked that the sun comes up in the East every day. How does it do that?!?


How what the fark.
 
2014-07-24 06:47:48 PM  

Paris1127: Oh, so since Glenn Beck is also a public figure, he can't punish me for publishing a list of questions about his actions in 1990, right?

Just asking questions here...


I'm just saying that my aunt has been a librarian since the 70s and there has most likely been at least one guy in the library named Glenn in that period. And who knows, that guy could have checked out any number of books related to criminology, forensic recovery of murder victims, or legal strategies for court. We really can't be sure one way or the other.
 
2014-07-24 06:50:08 PM  

NateAsbestos: gilgigamesh: Beck's legal team contends that the conservative radio host... is actually the real victim in this case.

Wait. A conservative with a victimhood complex who tries to blame others for his own stupid actions? I am shocked.

But then I am also shocked that the sun comes up in the East every day. How does it do that?!?

How what the fark.


Don't ya understand, libbylubber? It's a known fact that conservative white men are the biggest victims of history. More than victims of terrorism, the blacks, the poor and the Jews.
 
2014-07-24 06:50:22 PM  
You know I never thought I'd say this but....I really feel sorry for becks lawyers. They have to know this case is a loser and that their client is a moron.
 
2014-07-24 06:51:42 PM  

RexTalionis: gilgigamesh: RexTalionis: gilgigamesh: IIR defamation law C, the fact that the accusation is of criminal activity means malice is presumed, albeit subject to rebuttal.

So yeah. Beck better start writing that check.

Yeah, defamation per se, I had forgotten about it.

Beck's screwed.

Makes you wonder why his lawyers are bothering with this retarded public figure defense. Might as well allege parody if you're going in that half-baked.

Gotta argue something.


Lawyer: Look man, we should drop this and quielty pay out...
Beck: NO!!! NEVER! Who writes the checks here???
Lawyer: *shrugs* Okay then....

Something like that I'd bet.
 
2014-07-24 06:52:25 PM  
This is a chilling attack on Glenn Beck's First Amendment rights, and that is what makes Abdulrahman Alharbi the real terrorist here.
 
2014-07-24 06:53:28 PM  

Wyalt Derp: This is a chilling attack on Glenn Beck's First Amendment rights, and that is what makes Abdulrahman Alharbi the real terrorist here.


Meh.
 
2014-07-24 06:55:10 PM  
Grrrr....

Links not loading on mobile so i cant see the pic.

Is it one of the guys reddit and fark fingered and who got the headline of "bag men" at the new york post?

Or is it a different brown person in the crowd?
 
2014-07-24 06:57:12 PM  

gilgigamesh: RexTalionis: gilgigamesh: IIR defamation law C, the fact that the accusation is of criminal activity means malice is presumed, albeit subject to rebuttal.

So yeah. Beck better start writing that check.

Yeah, defamation per se, I had forgotten about it.

Beck's screwed.

Makes you wonder why his lawyers are bothering with this retarded public figure defense. Might as well allege parody if you're going in that half-baked.


Then you're not thinking hard enough about how he is going to pay his lawyers and the settlement. The more suckers he can convince that he did nothing wrong, the more money he gets to pay for his evil, callous words and actions.
 
2014-07-24 06:57:45 PM  

Weaver95: You know I never thought I'd say this but....I really feel sorry for becks lawyers. They have to know this case is a loser and that their client is a moron.


Beck's lawyers are crying all the way to the bank.
 
2014-07-24 06:58:49 PM  

NateAsbestos: gilgigamesh: Beck's legal team contends that the conservative radio host... is actually the real victim in this case.

Wait. A conservative with a victimhood complex who tries to blame others for his own stupid actions? I am shocked.

But then I am also shocked that the sun comes up in the East every day. How does it do that?!?

How what the fark.


he had the audacity of not being the terrorist beck said he was and made him look bad.
 
2014-07-24 06:59:19 PM  

Weaver95: You know I never thought I'd say this but....I really feel sorry for becks lawyers. They have to know this case is a loser and that their client is a moron.


They get paid either way.
 
2014-07-24 07:00:03 PM  

The Lizard People: Weaver95: You know I never thought I'd say this but....I really feel sorry for becks lawyers. They have to know this case is a loser and that their client is a moron.

Beck's lawyers are crying all the way to the bank.


*shakes fist*
 
2014-07-24 07:00:21 PM  

Weaver95: You know I never thought I'd say this but....I really feel sorry for becks lawyers. They have to know this case is a loser and that their client is a moron.


It's low-risk, high-reward for them.
 
2014-07-24 07:00:50 PM  

enry: Weaver95: You know I never thought I'd say this but....I really feel sorry for becks lawyers. They have to know this case is a loser and that their client is a moron.

They get paid either way.


Good point. Still...it cannot be easy to have to work for such an ignorant dick bag as Glenn beck.
 
2014-07-24 07:02:18 PM  
graphics8.nytimes.com

Not this shait again...
 
2014-07-24 07:07:31 PM  
"Pointing out my vilification of you makes you the real villain!"
 
2014-07-24 07:09:19 PM  

Giltric: Is it one of the guys reddit and fark fingered and who got the headline of "bag men" at the new york post?


Come on, you can figure out a way to blame the Libs, I know you can...
 
2014-07-24 07:09:31 PM  

Paris1127: Oh, so since Glenn Beck is also a public figure, he can't punish me for publishing a list of questions about his actions in 1990, right?

Just asking questions here...


Please, proceed.

I would love to tie Mr. Beck to a chair, and then post an ad on Craigslist for a group of "married" men in the m4m section to use his tonsils as a punching bag with their overly aggressive cocks.

And just when they finish, bring in another pack of them.
 
2014-07-24 07:09:57 PM  

gilgigamesh: RexTalionis: Beck will likely lose.

In addition to all the other elements of defamation, even if Abdulrahman Alharbi was an involuntary public figure (and turned into one by Beck), then all that changes is that the plaintiff must show that Beck spoke with "actual malice." That is, he either knew what he is saying is false or he recklessly made the statement without any regard for the truth of it (or, alternatively, he suspected what he was saying wasn't quite true).

Considering that when Beck made the allegations against Abdulrahman Alharbi, the FBI already had identified the Tsarnaev brothers as the suspects, I'd imagine that Abdulrahman Alharbi will be able to show that Beck was at least reckless, if he didn't know what he was saying was false.

Here are some samples of what he said:

Beck, however, had suspicions. The radio host urged the U.S. government to release information on Alharbi or Beck would "expose" him. "Let me send this message very clear," said Beck, who left Fox News in 2011. "We know who this Saudi national is.... We know who this man is and, listen to me carefully, we know he is a very bad, bad, bad man."

Beck continued days later: "While the media continues to look at what the causes were [behind] these two guys, there are, at this hour, three people involved," he said, alleging the U.S. government had "tagged" Alharbi as a "proven terrorist."

The broadcaster eventually called Alharbi an al-Qaeda "control agent" and the "money man" behind the attacks. "You know who the Saudi is?" Beck asked. "He's the money man. He's the guy who paid for it."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/04/01/glenn-b ec k-sued-for-defamation-after-calling-victim-of-boston-marathon-bombings -the-money-man-behind-attack/

IIR defamation law C, the fact that [if] the accusation is of criminal activity means malice is presumed, albeit subject to rebuttal.

So yeah. Beck better start writing that check.


I did not know that...  Granted, all I have is a few years of paralegal training and didn't go to law sch...wait, I think I still have my old torts textbook...one sec...

Found it!  Essentials of Torts, Second Edition, by William Statsky (Chapter 20)

let's see...

Well, admittedly it's an old book, but I can't find anything about malice being assumed if the accusation is one of criminal activity.  This doesn't really matter however, as unless things have changed since publication, there's no such thing as an "involuntary public figure":  you have to choose to do so via your career (i.e. Glenn "1990 rapist and murderer" Beck, Sarah "In what respect Charlie?" Palin) or advocacy (i.e. Bill and Melinda Gates, Jodie Evans)

Some interesting notes on Beck's case:

He can't claim he didn't refer to the plaintiff; he mentioned him by name...could say he wasn't negligent, but that would mean that he intentionally made the statements, which'd look real bad for him...

He MAY claim that it pertained to a matter of public concern, and therefore the plaintiff has to prove actual malice, but I would think being proven a liar would cover that (especially considering that the FBI backs the plaintiff, IIRC).

/IANAL, of course...
 
2014-07-24 07:14:36 PM  

friday13: gilgigamesh: RexTalionis: Beck will likely lose.

In addition to all the other elements of defamation, even if Abdulrahman Alharbi was an involuntary public figure (and turned into one by Beck), then all that changes is that the plaintiff must show that Beck spoke with "actual malice." That is, he either knew what he is saying is false or he recklessly made the statement without any regard for the truth of it (or, alternatively, he suspected what he was saying wasn't quite true).

Considering that when Beck made the allegations against Abdulrahman Alharbi, the FBI already had identified the Tsarnaev brothers as the suspects, I'd imagine that Abdulrahman Alharbi will be able to show that Beck was at least reckless, if he didn't know what he was saying was false.

Here are some samples of what he said:

Beck, however, had suspicions. The radio host urged the U.S. government to release information on Alharbi or Beck would "expose" him. "Let me send this message very clear," said Beck, who left Fox News in 2011. "We know who this Saudi national is.... We know who this man is and, listen to me carefully, we know he is a very bad, bad, bad man."

Beck continued days later: "While the media continues to look at what the causes were [behind] these two guys, there are, at this hour, three people involved," he said, alleging the U.S. government had "tagged" Alharbi as a "proven terrorist."

The broadcaster eventually called Alharbi an al-Qaeda "control agent" and the "money man" behind the attacks. "You know who the Saudi is?" Beck asked. "He's the money man. He's the guy who paid for it."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/04/01/glenn-b ec k-sued-for-defamation-after-calling-victim-of-boston-marathon-bombings -the-money-man-behind-attack/

IIR defamation law C, the fact that [if] the accusation is of criminal activity means malice is presumed, albeit subject to rebuttal.

So yeah. Beck better start writing that check.

I did not know that...  Granted, al ...


And that IANAL at the end really should have made me think more because I should have looked up what "slander per se" was.  Turns out it includes accusations of criminal activity.  Of course, since Beck is technically media, he may STILL need to prove malice, but I really doubt that would be too hard here.
 
2014-07-24 07:18:03 PM  
What the hell does this have to do with the A-20 Douglas Fighter?
 
2014-07-24 07:22:35 PM  

Paris1127: Oh, so since Glenn Beck is also a public figure, he can't punish me for publishing a list of questions about his actions in 1990, right?

Just asking questions here...


Because of that, and because it's obvious parody, you're correct.
 
2014-07-24 07:24:52 PM  
So when did this asshole get to decide policy? What about the alleged crime in 1990? Did he ever deny that?
 
2014-07-24 07:25:47 PM  
Plus, he gave interviews defending himself, said Beck's legal team, led by Michael J. Grygiel.

Instead of standing up and saying "You got me. Guilty as charged. Alahu You Know Who."
 
2014-07-24 07:26:35 PM  
Lot of ged lawyers in here. Except maybe rex. I think he's legit.
 
2014-07-24 07:29:54 PM  

WizardofToast: NateAsbestos: gilgigamesh: Beck's legal team contends that the conservative radio host... is actually the real victim in this case.

Wait. A conservative with a victimhood complex who tries to blame others for his own stupid actions? I am shocked.

But then I am also shocked that the sun comes up in the East every day. How does it do that?!?

How what the fark.

Don't ya understand, libbylubber? It's a known fact that conservative white men are the biggest victims of history. More than victims of terrorism, the blacks, the poor and the Jews.


As a conservative white man, I'd just like to point out that this is all your fault.
 
2014-07-24 07:30:22 PM  

any excuse is a good excuse to post my favorite legal documents ever

Beck v Eiland Hall response brief

Beck V Eiland Hall surreply

thank you glenn beck's legal team for creating the opportunity for this paragraph to be submitted to a court of law

"We are not here because the domain name could cause confusion. We do not have a declaration from the president of the international association of imbeciles that his members are blankly staring at the Respondent's website wondering "where did all the race baiting content go?" We are here because Mr. Beck wants Respondent's website shut down. "
 
2014-07-24 07:33:33 PM  

fatalvenom: Paris1127: Oh, so since Glenn Beck is also a public figure, he can't punish me for publishing a list of questions about his actions in 1990, right?

Just asking questions here...

Please, proceed.

I would love to tie Mr. Beck to a chair, and then post an ad on Craigslist for a group of "married" men in the m4m section to use his tonsils as a punching bag with their overly aggressive cocks.

And just when they finish, bring in another pack of them.


Fark is not your personal erotica site.
 
2014-07-24 07:33:43 PM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: Paris1127: Oh, so since Glenn Beck is also a public figure, he can't punish me for publishing a list of questions about his actions in 1990, right?

Just asking questions here...

I'm just saying that my aunt has been a librarian since the 70s and there has most likely been at least one guy in the library named Glenn in that period. And who knows, that guy could have checked out any number of books related to criminology, forensic recovery of murder victims, or legal strategies for court. We really can't be sure one way or the other.


Might that have included newspaper clippings about a girl who was raped and murdered about that time?
 
2014-07-24 07:35:38 PM  
We're overlooking the real victims here.  The rubes, idiots, bigots, racists, and old folks that make up Glenns audience.  Just think of the increase in calls for donations that Glenn will be delivering.
 
2014-07-24 07:36:12 PM  

The Why Not Guy: Giltric: Is it one of the guys reddit and fark fingered and who got the headline of "bag men" at the new york post?

Come on, you can figure out a way to blame the Libs, I know you can...


Ok Ill play......


I thought I already did by mentioning Fark.
 
2014-07-24 07:39:01 PM  

RexTalionis: Gotta argue something.


Yeah, there's that. Or, he could have quietly corrected himself on-air within a reasonable amount of time, apologizing for the "error" and assuring his listeners that the plaintiff was a law-abiding student and not a suspect.

Instead he grabs a fresh shovel and starts straight down with renewed vigor.

Damage control people. Damage control.
 
2014-07-24 07:39:12 PM  
I was involved in a lawsuit where a media defendant, a local newspaper, made this exact argument in an effort of have a libel lawsuit dismissed.  We represented the plaintiff.  The newspaper did not prevail with this argument.
 
2014-07-24 07:39:34 PM  
Odds are, Glenn and his lawyers know he's got a poor defense.  He's just trying to save face for his listeners, so he can claim this was all a liberal Muslim plot.
 
2014-07-24 07:40:00 PM  

FatherDale: As a conservative white man, I'd just like to point out that this is all your fault.


That really should be the GOP's motto. It's brilliant...concise, pointed, doesn't waste time.

Well done!
 
2014-07-24 07:43:17 PM  

hardinparamedic: What the hell does this have to do with the A-20 Douglas Fighter?


The A-20 was close air support; the P-70 variant was the night fighter.

The reason some Fark admin always tags it that way is because the Commonwealth named the export variant they purchased the "Boston".  Hence, it is a Boston Bomber.
 
2014-07-24 07:45:40 PM  

NateAsbestos: FatherDale: As a conservative white man, I'd just like to point out that this is all your fault.

That really should be the GOP's motto. It's brilliant...concise, pointed, doesn't waste time.

Well done!


Well, maybe so, but that's not my fault.
 
2014-07-24 07:49:00 PM  

FatherDale: NateAsbestos: FatherDale: As a conservative white man, I'd just like to point out that this is all your fault.

That really should be the GOP's motto. It's brilliant...concise, pointed, doesn't waste time.

Well done!

Well, maybe so, but that's not my fault.


No, I was sayin--- wait.

Damn you!
 
2014-07-24 07:51:04 PM  

RexTalionis: gilgigamesh: IIR defamation law C, the fact that the accusation is of criminal activity means malice is presumed, albeit subject to rebuttal.

So yeah. Beck better start writing that check.

Yeah, defamation per se, I had forgotten about it.

Beck's screwed.


I don't remember that defamation per se created  a rebuttable presumption of  malice.  I remember that it did relieve the plaintiff of the burden of proving actual damages proximately caused by the damage to the plaintiff's reputation. Of course there's the First Amendment limitations involved too which will override the usual tort standards for private plaintiff vs private defendant cases. There's an Alabama case I think that applies but I can't recall it without looking it up.  Which I will do now lest I drive myself to distraction trying to remember it.
 
Displayed 50 of 122 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 »






Report