Students at AZ State Univ. demand Rittenhouse be EXPELLED.

[Lionfish]

If I was a parent I would pull my child from that university. Rittenhouse is a crazy murderer.

The world is appreciative that you never reproduced. Thank you for that.

[SmarterthanYou]

Rittenhouse - charged with murder and acquitted.
OJ - charged with murder and acquitted.

They look pretty similar to me.

except that there is no video to substantiate OJs story......there's plenty of video evidence that substantiates rittenhouses acquittal
so unless there's a lawyer so fucking stupid as to not eliminate biased jurors, OR the judge doesn't dismiss it outright.....OR, the most likely scenario, is no fucking lawyer is going to try and represent the family wanting to sue rittenhouse when there's crystal clear evidence that shows rittenhouse was forced to shoot their family member.....

Rittenhouse - charged with murder and acquitted.
Sandman - filmed in DC with a Native American - accused of mocking him.

They don't look that similar.

there are over a dozen solid pieces of audio and video showing over a dozen liberal pundits slandering rittenhouse with no facts in evidence and no basis to do so

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Is that so?

A slander per se claim does not require that the plaintiff prove special damages.

This is because slander per se claims involve categories of defamatory statements that are presumed to be damaging to the plaintiff. While the categories may change a little from state to state, and evolve over the years, one of the most common slander per se categories is imputing criminal conduct to the plaintiff.

If the defamatory statement falls into the category of libel, the plaintiff only needs to prove the essential elements, i.e. 1) the defendant published a defamatory statement about the plaintiff and 2) other people were exposed to the statement.

There are no additional requirements because the law presumes that once the publication of a defamatory statement has been made in written or other formats, the statement will remain in the public sphere for a long time and continue to do harm.

Once the plaintiff has successfully proved defamation, "general damages" are presumed.

The plaintiff is not simply limited to damages reflecting his or her economic losses, but the mental anguish and other emotional distress that the law presumes to result from having your reputation harmed.

Depending on what the plaintiff proves about the defendant's intentions, and the type of defendant, punitive damages may also be awarded to the plaintiff.

https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/civil-litigation/defamation-libel-slander.html

Gosh, Legion. Do you have a hard time reading?
This is Wisconsin standards similar to your link.

Slander will be classified as ‘per se’ when the statement in question alleges:

A criminal offense
A loathsome disease -
Unchastity
Statements regarding plaintiff in his or her business or profession [efn_note]Bauer v. Murphy, 191 Wis. 2d 517, 530 N.W.2d 1, 3–4 (Ct. App. 1995).[/efn_note]

1. It is a fact that Rittenhouse committed homicide. It was ruled justified homicide by the jury when they accepted his self defense claim which is based on his admission that he committed homicide. Anyone claiming Rittenhouse committed murder would not be committing slander/libel since he did commit a homicide under the law.
2. Unless you are claiming that conservatism is a horrible disease this doesn't apply.
3. Doesn't apply.
4. Rittenhouse is not a business since he is a 17 year old so it doesn't apply.

But then you failed to consider that Rittenhouse is a public figure. As such the requirements to prove slander are higher than for someone that isn't a public figure.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

except that there is no video to substantiate OJs story......there's plenty of video evidence that substantiates rittenhouses acquittal
so unless there's a lawyer so fucking stupid as to not eliminate biased jurors, OR the judge doesn't dismiss it outright.....OR, the most likely scenario, is no fucking lawyer is going to try and represent the family wanting to sue rittenhouse when there's crystal clear evidence that shows rittenhouse was forced to shoot their family member.....


there are over a dozen solid pieces of audio and video showing over a dozen liberal pundits slandering rittenhouse with no facts in evidence and no basis to do so

ROFLMAO. Quick question for you. Did Rittenhouse commit a homicide?
Unless you answer "yes" you would be slandering him under your idiotic argument.

[Legion]

But then you failed to consider that Rittenhouse is a public figure. As such the requirements to prove slander are higher than for someone that isn't a public figure.

Is that so?

What part of the Wisconsin civil code gave you that idea, and who told you that plaintiff cannot seek legal remedies in Arizona where the defamation apparently occurred?

BTW, homicide is one thing; murder is another.

[Legion]

ROFLMAO. Quick question for you. Did Rittenhouse commit a homicide? Unless you answer "yes" you would be slandering him under your idiotic argument.

The four groups are calling him "Murderer Kyle Rittenhouse."

https://news.yahoo.com/arizona-university-students-demand-administration-031620144.html

[T. A. Gardner]

Let's see...

The four student groups that want Rittenhouse gone are:

Students for Socialism
MEChA (Movimiento Estudiantil Chicanx de Aztlán)
Students for Justice in Palestine
Multicultural Solidarity Coalition

So, one tiny group of Socialists, two tiny groups that support terrorism, genocide, and racism, and one of general radical Leftist nutbags, that amount in total to probably less than 100 students (out of over 53,000 on ASU's campuses or about 1/10th of 1%) want Rittenhouse gone.

https://arizonadailyindependent.com/...d-from-campus/

It'll be interesting to see how many students (and non-student Leftist crazies) show up in support of this for their protest Wednesday...

[Legion]

Let's see...

They called him a murderer and a white supremacist.

That's defamation per se.

[T. A. Gardner]

They called him a murderer and a white supremacist.

That's defamation per se.

It's also par for the course with super radical far Leftists like these groups are...

[Legion]

It's also par for the course with super radical far Leftists like these groups are...

Perhaps, but that's not the point.

They won't have a defense if Rittenhouse sues, as far as I can see.

[T. A. Gardner]

A bit more about these groups:

Students for Justice in Palestine. The usual radical Leftists supporting Palestine and terrorist groups like Hamas. While they don't openly call for the destruction of Israel, their motives amount to that.

https://www.nationalsjp.org/about

Thus, radical Leftists in solidarity with terrorists, racists, and general haters.

Multicultural Solidarity Coalition

This one is local to ASU and seems more interested in safe spaces and multicultural facilities (eg., segregation and facilities for only certain minorities or genders).https://www.facebook.com/multicultur...aritycoalition

MEChA (Movimiento Estudiantil Chicanx de Aztlán)

This radical Leftist group, that is also openly and hostilely racist, calls for the establishment of the nation of Atzlan, consisting of most of the Southwestern US. That is, they are all but actively insurgents and traitors wanting to overthrow US sovereignty over this area and then forcibly remove all non-Hispanics and non-Native Americans from their new nation.
https://csuci.campuslabs.com/engage/...ztlan-m-e-ch-a

And, last and least is Students for Socialism. They seem to be an offshoot of Antifa given their red and black club emblem and photos on their Facebook page that shows them carrying Antifa related flags and using Antifa's symbols.

https://www.facebook.com/SocialismASU/
https://www.mebere.com/students-soci...le-rittenhouse

So, a tiny bunch of super, radical, far Leftist terrorists, anarchists, racists, haters, and associated jackasses want Rittenhouse off campus. How meaningless.

[T. A. Gardner]

Perhaps, but that's not the point.

They won't have a defense if Rittenhouse sues, as far as I can see.

They don't have any money, they're college students. The best you can hope for is to make them STFU for a bit.

[PostmodernProphet]

ROFLMAO. Quick question for you. Did Rittenhouse commit a homicide?

then every lib'rul pundit who called him a homicide-er instead of a murderer may have a defense.....

[Grokmaster]

They call him a murderer which makes it look like they want to be sued!!

AS ALWAYS, THE STALINIST LEFT SEEKS TO DENY ANYONE THEY DISAGREE WITH THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL AND NATURAL RIGHTS...

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Is that so?

What part of the Wisconsin civil code gave you that idea, and who told you that plaintiff cannot seek legal remedies in Arizona where the defamation apparently occurred?

BTW, homicide is one thing; murder is another.

Found in Wisconsin code under damages for libel.

If a defamation plaintiff is a public figure, there must be proof of actual malice. The deliberate choice of one interpretation of a number of possible interpretations does not create a jury issue of actual malice. The selective destruction by a defendant of materials likely to be relevant to defamation litigation allows an inference that the materials would have provided evidence of actual malice, but the inference is of little weight when uncontroverted testimony makes the malice assertion a remote possibility. Torgerson v. Journal/Sentinel, Inc., 210 Wis. 2d 524, 563 N.W.2d 472 (1997), 95-1098.

Deciding that a homicide is murder is one of a number of possible interpretations of that act and there can be no question that Rittenhouse committed a homicide since his defense was that he was justified in committing it.

You will find that the Az code isn't much different from Wisconsin.