Kanye W. reportedly sued for $250 Million for questioning OFFICIAL george floyd story

T

Text Drivers are Killers

Joe Biden - "Time to put Trump in the bullseye."
Again we see how the left hates free speech. Alex Jones was bankrupted for questioning the official story on sandy hook. The judge even DENIED jones his right to a trial. If kanye is allowed a trial maybe the truth will come out. Chauvin did nothing wrong.

https://www.breitbart.com/entertain...unces-250-million-lawsuit-against-kanye-west/

oct 18 2022 The mother of George Floyd’s daughter has reportedly announced a $250 million lawsuit against Kanye West, claiming the billionaire rapper and fashion mogul’s recent comments in which he seemed to attribute Floyd’s death to fentanyl and not police brutality have “retraumatized” her daughter.

Roxie Washington’s lawyers allege West’s comments constitute “harassment, misappropriation, defamation, and infliction of emotional distress,” according to a letter obtained by Yahoo Entertainment. It remains unclear how West’s remarks are defamatory since the dead cannot be defamed under the law.

“The interests of the child are priority. George Floyd’s daughter is being retraumatized by Kanye West’s comments and he’s creating an unsafe and unhealthy environment for her,” attorney Nuru Witherspoon said.

The lawsuit will reportedly also go after West’s “business partners” and “associates.”
Click to expand...
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
Again we see how the left hates free speech. Alex Jones was bankrupted for questioning the official story on sandy hook. The judge even DENIED jones his right to a trial. If kanye is allowed a trial maybe the truth will come out. Chauvin did nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

Jones was not sued for questioning the official story. He was sued for defamation for causing the parents of the murdered children to go through a living hell with threats and constant harassment by idiots who believed Jone's story.

He is no longer Kanye. He is now Ye.

Free speech and free press laws have always included exceptions for libel and defamation.
 
The critical fact the swamp media never told the public . Floyd was saying "i can't breathe" BEFORE chauvin put him on the ground. Chauvin knew floyd was ODing and would go berzerk when he got to the point where he truly could not breathe.

It's also possible Floyd was saying "i can't breathe" the way all black thugs say it in the hopes they can sue for money later. Anyway chauvin couldn't chance that and did the right thing.
 
Flash said:
Jones was not sued for questioning the official story. He was sued for defamation for causing the parents of the murdered children to go through a living hell with threats and constant harassment by idiots who believed Jone's story.
Click to expand...

is that even a theory of tort law?....they didn't know about that one in law school back in the 70s......of course, the judges were smarter then......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
is that even a theory of tort law?....they didn't know about that one in law school back in the 70s......of course, the judges were smarter then......
Click to expand...

Yes, defamation is a tort. It caused injury due to a person's false statements. I'm pretty sure it existed in the 70's.
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
Again we see how the left hates free speech. Alex Jones was bankrupted for questioning the official story on sandy hook. The judge even DENIED jones his right to a trial. If kanye is allowed a trial maybe the truth will come out. Chauvin did nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

HOW DARE HE QUESTION THE STALINIST POLITBURO'S RACE-BASED EVERYTHING!!!!???
 
Flash said:
Yes, defamation is a tort. It caused injury due to a person's false statements. I'm pretty sure it existed in the 70's.
Click to expand...

unlike you I am familiar with the requirements of the tort of defamation.......it requires statements about people, not statements about crimes.......and I'm pretty sure you don't have a fucking clue what they taught us in law school in the 70s.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
unlike you I am familiar with the requirements of the tort of defamation.......it requires statements about people, not statements about crimes.......and I'm pretty sure you don't have a fucking clue what they taught us in law school in the 70s.......
Click to expand...

It was a statement about people.

"[FONT=&quot]Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis were seeking $150 million from Jones after he told listeners of his Austin-based website and broadcast Infowars that the nation’s second deadliest school shooting — in which 20 children and six adults were killed — was faked by the government in order to take away Americans’ guns. His claims led his listeners to harass the victims’ families and make death threats against them for years."

I don't have a clue what you were taught in law school. But, if it was accredited, it probably included defamation, libel, slander; unless you didn't take that course. [/FONT]
 
PostmodernProphet said:
no......the article says he questioned the facts of the shooting........the parents were not shooters......
Click to expand...

His statement was a lie. It caused injury to the defendant. The jury determined he should pay damages. The parents were defamed.

I didn't have to go to law school to know he was found liable for defamation.
 
Flash said:
His statement was a lie. It caused injury to the defendant. The jury determined he should pay damages. The parents were defamed.

I didn't have to go to law school to know he was found liable for defamation.
Click to expand...

You say jones was lying but you have no evidence. Nobody knows for sure and that means jones can give his opinion. If the judge had let the case go to trial, the jury would have found for jones.
 
Flash said:
His statement was a lie. It caused injury to the defendant. The jury determined he should pay damages. The parents were defamed.

I didn't have to go to law school to know he was found liable for defamation.
Click to expand...

unless the statement was about the parents it does not meet the standard of defamation........because you DIDN'T go to law school you are not aware that the definition of "defamation" has either changed or been improperly applied......now go back to playing armchair lawyer.......
 
Flash said:
Jones was not sued for questioning the official story. He was sued for defamation for causing the parents of the murdered children to go through a living hell with threats and constant harassment by idiots who believed Jone's story.

He is no longer Kanye. He is now Ye.

Free speech and free press laws have always included exceptions for libel and defamation.
Click to expand...

Among other thoughtful comments he said their dead five year olds were paid actors.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
unlike you I am familiar with the requirements of the tort of defamation.......it requires statements about people, not statements about crimes.......and I'm pretty sure you don't have a fucking clue what they taught us in law school in the 70s.......
Click to expand...

Jones statements were about people and nothing in the post you criticized suggested otherwise. Incidentally, a first rate law school can and not infrequently does produce third rate lawyers.
 
martin said:
Jones statements were about people and nothing in the post you criticized suggested otherwise. Incidentally, a first rate law school can and not infrequently does produce third rate lawyers.
Click to expand...

1) the article in the OP says nothing of statements about people, particularly nothing of statements about the parents.....it identifies them as lies about the event...
2) armchairs produce the worst lawyers......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
1) the article in the OP says nothing of statements about people, particularly nothing of statements about the parents.....it identifies them as lies about the event...
2) armchairs produce the worst lawyers......
Click to expand...

On your second point you may be your own example. Any lawyer able to remain in practice would recognize "the event" was an event involving people, and if the lawyer knew first thing about the case he
referenced he would know Jones was sued for his libelous statements about such people.
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
You say jones was lying but you have no evidence. Nobody knows for sure and that means jones can give his opinion. If the judge had let the case go to trial, the jury would have found for jones.
Click to expand...

Yes, we all know for sure. All the parents whose children were murdered know for sure. Law enforcement who investigated know for sure. Funeral home directors know for sure. Relatives and friends know for sure.

Jones is also a know liar and con man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top