Is this libelous?

[MacIrish75]

I saw this over on II. Unbelievable the kind of **** that people can get away with on the internet. The question posed over there, was, is this libel?

At any rate, it's a huge shame that this kind of stuff is out there online.

Link removed by admin.

 

[NDFANnSouthWest]

that is in bad taste...to say the least!

 

[IrishLax]

Yeah I'm pretty sure you can sue.

On another note, I wouldn't link that.

 

[PatsandBostonfan1975]

thats gross man I dont know if we should even have that linked here.

 

[MacIrish75]

Sorry about that. I questioned linking it, or not. Admin removed it before I could myself. At any rate it's a shame people can put that kind of stuff out there.

 

[Cali_domer]

Yes this libelous, pretty easy actually.. What a a fvcking idiot.

 

[ThePiombino]

<---- Late to the party. What did I miss?

 

[Kingbish01]

Being late to the party as well and had to guess about the link. I would guess it was a video. Glad it was removed, we don't need everyone in here clicking the link and giving it hits.

 

[IrishLax]

For what it's worth, I'm pretty sure 'the player' could sue the one Tribune hack and the poster of that video very easily. The Tribune writer crossed a huge line with her description. It'd be like saying "the player cannot be named... but he was the starting QB against such and such a team." Implicitly naming the student = illegal as far as I'm aware, but I'm an engineer not a lawyer. The video poster is straight libel. That would be a very easy case to win.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

I haven't seen the link, but truth is an absolute defense to libel, so if it's just "outing" the student or posting a video of him then there's probably no case. That is, if the poster doesn't actually accuse the player, but merely says that "X has been accused" then technically that's true and an absolute defense.

Even if there were a cause of action, the player would still need to show some reasonable monetary damage to his reputation (and NFL draft stock would be waaaay too speculative at this point).

Now, if a lynch mob came and beat up the player, and the poster could have reasonably foreseen that, then you might be able to get him on a negligence theory.

Or, if the poster revealed confidential disciplinary records without consent then there may be a violation of state or federal law.

 

[woolybug25]

I haven't seen the link, but truth is an absolute defense to libel, so if it's just "outing" the student or posting a video of him then there's probably no case. That is, if the poster doesn't actually accuse the player, but merely says that "X has been accused" then technically that's true and an absolute defense.

Even if there were a cause of action, the player would still need to show some reasonable monetary damage to his reputation (and NFL draft stock would be waaaay too speculative at this point).

Now, if a lynch mob came and beat up the player, and the poster could have reasonably foreseen that, then you might be able to get him on a negligence theory.

Or, if the poster revealed confidential disciplinary records without consent then there may be a violation of state or federal law.

Thats a good breakdown.

Question - For those that saw the link, I have no interest in whom, but did it indeed insuinate a particular player is the one in question?

 

[IrishLax]

Yes, it explicitly mentions the player and provides a picture of him

 

[NDFANnSouthWest]

Now the story (not the video) is on Good Morning america and ESPN...the father being interveiwed.

 

[woolybug25]

Yes, it explicitly mentions the player and provides a picture of him

Thats messed up. The sad part is that the video WILL get out. The court of public opinion is going to cast the shadow of guilt over whomever this player is. Unfortunetely, the court of public opinion needs no evidence to find their guilty party.

If I am the player in question, especially if he has nfl aspirations, i'm suing everyone.