Suing Cosmo Kramer

klaatu

klaatu

Fusionist
The two men Kramer verbally attacked are suing him for an apology... and if the judge decides monetary damage is due...they'll accept that as well...

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/61110/Men_Seek_Apology_read_Money_From_Ex_Seinfeld_Star

Things are getting out of whack... Michael Irving almost lost his broadcasting position for cracking Tony Romo must have some slave genes because he is too athletic for a white guy... Irving is black of course.... one must wonder what would have happened if he were white! Lets not forget what happened to Jimmy the Greek years ago.

The super sensitive USA ..... is it still wonderful to be an American?
 
Some people on here would have had a different attitude if Kramer had just waterboarded the heckler ;) Sad/strange but true.
 
haven't read the article yet, but I thought one can only sue someone if they have been hurt somehow by the actions of the other.... Who the hell was HURT by Kramer's statements, OTHER than Kramer himself?

What ever happened to:
Sticks and stones , may break my bones, but names will never hurt me?
 
That went away with the suing when falling on the floor while watching somebody mop...

The chant has changed a bit. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will make me sue you!"
 
Well, I would have probably been upset if someone did that to me at a suposedly comedy routine that I paid for. That was extremely humiliating and would stick with you - particularly when you are paying to be entertained. I wouldn't be so quick as to dismiss their lawsuit as frivolous.

Free speech is one thing, but verbally abusing someone is another. Richards has no leg to stand on in my opinion - there was no comedic element to his outburst and even he readily admits it. Do you think people have a right to verbally abuse you in name of free speech?
 
LadyT said:
Well, I would have probably been upset if someone did that to me at a suposedly comedy routine that I paid for. That was extremely humiliating and would stick with you - particularly when you are paying to be entertained. I wouldn't be so quick as to dismiss their lawsuit as frivolous.

Free speech is one thing, but verbally abusing someone is another. Richards has no leg to stand on in my opinion - there was no comedic element to his outburst and even he readily admits it. Do you think people have a right to verbally abuse you in name of free speech?
Click to expand...

If they get their money back for the tickets and drinks they bought, their parking fees, and gas to drive to the show, that would be fair.


I can't see how they could have a case for pain and suffering damages, or punitive damages though. That will never see the light of day in court.
 
LadyT said:
Well, I would have probably been upset if someone did that to me at a suposedly comedy routine that I paid for. That was extremely humiliating and would stick with you - particularly when you are paying to be entertained. I wouldn't be so quick as to dismiss their lawsuit as frivolous.

Free speech is one thing, but verbally abusing someone is another. Richards has no leg to stand on in my opinion - there was no comedic element to his outburst and even he readily admits it. Do you think people have a right to verbally abuse you in name of free speech?
Click to expand...
I think they need to show real damage. People get their feelings hurt all the time. Even badly.

I laughed when I heard this guy... "I had to explain what that word meant to my 4 year old Nephew!" What was his 4 year old doing watching the video to begin with? It sounds like his Nephew has a case against him, at least...
 
klaatu said:
The two men Kramer verbally attacked are suing him for an apology... and if the judge decides monetary damage is due...they'll accept that as well...

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/61110/Men_Seek_Apology_read_Money_From_Ex_Seinfeld_Star

Things are getting out of whack... Michael Irving almost lost his broadcasting position for cracking Tony Romo must have some slave genes because he is too athletic for a white guy... Irving is black of course.... one must wonder what would have happened if he were white! Lets not forget what happened to Jimmy the Greek years ago.

The super sensitive USA ..... is it still wonderful to be an American?
Click to expand...

im not really suprised are you... LOL... how pathetic... i guess its the american dream to sue these days... how were they damaged monetarily... can i sue for them calling me a cracker?
 
Cypress said:
If they get their money back for the tickets and drinks they bought, their parking fees, and gas to drive to the show, that would be fair.


I can't see how they could have a case for pain and suffering damages, or punitive damages though. That will never see the light of day in court.
Click to expand...


cypress do you want to Richards to bake em a pie too?? jesus, they didn't have to see him in the first place, while its unfortunate, those are risks you take in life and are noncompensable.
 
Cypress said:
If they get their money back for the tickets and drinks they bought, their parking fees, and gas to drive to the show, that would be fair.


I can't see how they could have a case for pain and suffering damages, or punitive damages though. That will never see the light of day in court.
Click to expand...

Maybe not these guys since they were engaging his idiocy right back at him by calling him a cracker from the audience.
But I still put the question out there, do people have a right to verbally abuse and humiliate you in the name of free speech? Should the government play a role in this.

I personally say yes. Maybe not to the point where its criminal. I do think unprovoked degradation solely based on a persons gender, ethnicity, xesual orientation, or religion should come with at least a financial penalty if it can be shown that the person has unduely (sp?) suffered.
 
Connecticut Stud said:
cypress do you want to Richards to bake em a pie too?? jesus, they didn't have to see him in the first place, while its unfortunate, those are risks you take in life and are noncompensable.
Click to expand...

They had no idea they'd be attacked like that. I'm sure if they did, they wouldn't have come. at the very least they deserve to get their money back. They went to a "comedy" show. Not a klan rally.
 
LadyT said:
Well, I would have probably been upset if someone did that to me at a suposedly comedy routine that I paid for. That was extremely humiliating and would stick with you - particularly when you are paying to be entertained. I wouldn't be so quick as to dismiss their lawsuit as frivolous.

Free speech is one thing, but verbally abusing someone is another. Richards has no leg to stand on in my opinion - there was no comedic element to his outburst and even he readily admits it. Do you think people have a right to verbally abuse you in name of free speech?
Click to expand...

yes.

Suck it up.
 
LadyT said:
They had no idea they'd be attacked like that. I'm sure if they did, they wouldn't have come. at the very least they deserve to get their money back. They went to a "comedy" show. Not a klan rally.
Click to expand...

Lady T, they are non compensable damages... I am an avid watcher of Judge Judy and Marylin Millan (go ahead laugh)... you cant sue for that b/c you aren't damaged.... they might be able to get their ticket back but from what i heard the comedy club already refunded them... they aren't going to get anything...

maybe i should go to a comedy club and when i hear them say "fag" turn around and sue for 5000 dollars.... its noncompensable.
 
Connecticut Stud said:
Lady T, they are non compensable damages... I am an avid watcher of Judge Judy and Marylin Millan (go ahead laugh)... you cant sue for that b/c you aren't damaged.... they might be able to get their ticket back but from what i heard the comedy club already refunded them... they aren't going to get anything...

maybe i should go to a comedy club and when i hear them say "f@g" turn around and sue for 5000 dollars.... its noncompensable.
Click to expand...

And I'm saying harassment like that should be. If you're minding your own business and someone harasses you for being g@y, they shouldn't have a right to do that, particularly when its unprovoked.
 
LadyT said:
And I'm saying harassment like that should be. If you're minding your own business and someone harasses you for being g@y, they shouldn't have a right to do that, particularly when its unprovoked.
Click to expand...
I really don't think it was unprovoked...

First, as I said, people get their feelings hurt all the time. Where are you going to draw the line?

Glorious People will Speak only in Glorious terms! March on to victory!
 
Do you people read?

LadyT said:
Maybe not these guys since they were engaging his idiocy right back at him by calling him a cracker from the audience.
But I still put the question out there, do people have a right to verbally abuse and humiliate you in the name of free speech? Should the government play a role in this.
Click to expand...

I'll go slower ->>>

These guys: probably no case. see cracker comment.

New question: should a person be able to verbally abuse you unprovoked with no legal consequences?
 
Damocles said:
I really don't think it was unprovoked...

First, as I said, people get their feelings hurt all the time. Where are you going to draw the line?

Glorious People will Speak only in Glorious terms! March on to victory!
Click to expand...

That would be up to the judge and it would depend on the situation. There are currently limitations to FOS. I'm simply saying verbally abusing someone unprovoked based on the criteria I outlined earlier should be one of them.
 
LadyT said:
Do you people read?



I'll go slower ->>>

These guys: probably no case. see cracker comment.

New question: should a person be able to verbally abuse you unprovoked with no legal consequences?
Click to expand...
Imagine all the courts sewn up with kids and their bullies... everybody afraid to say anything at all, comedians constantly sued for harrassing an audience member during an act (not like this, not part of the act)...

Crying about people's feelings hurt is too much for our courts to handle. I, for one, do not want to live in the Glorious Society where speech is credited and equated to actual harm.
 
LadyT said:
Do you people read?



I'll go slower ->>>

These guys: probably no case. see cracker comment.

New question: should a person be able to verbally abuse you unprovoked with no legal consequences?
Click to expand...


should a person be able to verbally abuse you unprovoked with no legal consequences?


No, a repetitive pattern of abusive language is considered harrasment under the law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top