0
   

Dominion Starts Rolling Out the Lawsuits

 
 
oralloy
 
  7  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2021 12:08 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
this wasnt against a public figure. The case is being brought by a company, who is the aggrieved party.

The company was clearly in the public eye.


farmerman wrote:
In a civil case, the plaintiff merely needs to show the preponderence of evidence supports its claim. "Why Rudy and Hortense lied" is immaterial.
For example, filing incorrect or false information causing damage to Dominion is the basis of the civil case in total. Court doesnt reach a verdict based on whether you "meant it" or not, the damage is the issue and whether the damage was not an "Act of Frd"

Not when it comes to public figures.
Below viewing threshold (view)
oralloy
 
  7  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2021 01:06 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
stop being an idiot

You cannot provide any examples of idiocy in my posts.


farmerman wrote:
So is a Supermarket.

Not necessarily. A supermarket would probably not have had anything to do with the election controversy.


farmerman wrote:
Now you're trying to say "being in the pubic eye makes one a public figure".

Hopefully I succeeded in saying it.


farmerman wrote:
Keep stretching the facts, maybe you'll snap

You cannot provide any examples of me stretching facts.
farmerman
 
  -4  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2021 01:09 pm
@oralloy,
see my first comment above.
oralloy
 
  7  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2021 01:10 pm
@farmerman,
See my reply to your first comment above.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2021 01:42 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
I doubt that Dominion can prove that any falsehoods were said with malice.
I would think they would only have to prove that their company was slandered without a factual basis, and suffered reputational damage because of it. That could include claims like:
- they worked with the democrats to fraudulently steal the election
- they designed their machines to enable fraudulent elections
- etc

It wouldn't be up to Dominion to disprove this, but up to Guiliani etc to prove their was a factual basis for their slander of Dominion. And I think, given the degree of the slander, Guiliani etc would have to possess a very strong factual basis.
engineer
 
  -4  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2021 01:45 pm
@vikorr,
I think Giuliani also loses because he didn't retract his statements when they were shown to be false. It's one thing to say "I heard this", it is another to keep saying it when it has been debunked. He can't really say "well, I thought that was true" as a defense.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  7  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2021 01:52 pm
@vikorr,
vikorr wrote:
I would think they would only have to prove that their company was slandered without a factual basis, and suffered reputational damage because of it.

When it comes to slandering public figures there also has to be proof of malice.


vikorr wrote:
It wouldn't be up to Dominion to disprove this, but up to Guiliani etc to prove their was a factual basis for their slander of Dominion.

It is up to them to disprove it.

If Dominion can't make a case that the statements in question are untrue, then they have no case.
vikorr
 
  -4  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2021 01:53 pm
@oralloy,
See engineers comments above.

That said, dominion is not a public figure. It is a company / corporation
oralloy
 
  7  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2021 01:55 pm
@vikorr,
vikorr wrote:
See engineers comments above.

We'll see how it plays out in court.


vikorr wrote:
That said, dominion is not a public figure.

I disagree. They were in the public eye.


vikorr wrote:
It is a company.

A company that was in the public eye.
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
tsarstepan
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 9 Feb, 2021 07:34 pm
@engineer,
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 08/02/2021 at 04:56:46