• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Seth Rich's brother sues right-wing activists & Washington Times

BillC said:
http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/27/media/seth-rich-brother-sues-washington-times/index.html

What are the chances of this action succeeding in the US? My belief is that First Amendment issues give it very little chance, but I really have very little idea.
Click to expand...

From your link, the 'victim' is not a public person, except in as much as he has been made one by those he is suing. They seem to have claimed that he has committed serious crimes. Given his occupation it is possible that such allegations may have impacted on his employability and genuinely caused him financial loss. They have continued to do so despite being asked to desist and being informed of the true facts. This would appear to make the behaviour malicious, verging on cyber harassment.

If people can not be sued for falsely claiming an ordinary person has committed serious crimes and widely publishing the claims and continuing to do so despite being corrected and being asked to desist then the law is sadly lacking.
 
The dead cannot be defamed. That is what libel and slander fall under legally.

So, while his brother can whine and file lawsuits about the sullying of Seth's memory, I doubt that he will prevail.
 
desmirelle said:
The dead cannot be defamed. That is what libel and slander fall under legally.

So, while his brother can whine and file lawsuits about the sullying of Seth's memory, I doubt that he will prevail.
Click to expand...

My reading of the link indicates that it is Seth's alive brother, Aaron Rich who is suing for the sullying of his own, Aaron Rich's reputation, etc.
 
Giordano said:
My reading of the link indicates that it is Seth's alive brother, Aaron Rich who is suing for the sullying of his own, Aaron Rich's reputation, etc.
Click to expand...
This^

For anyone who needs review, the consensus is Seth Rich was killed in a robbery:
The life and death of the Seth Rich conspiracy theory
Over seven frenzied days, Dotcom had become a leading purveyor of the theory that Rich, a staffer at the Democratic National Committee who was shot dead near his home in Northeast Washington last summer, had supplied DNC documents to WikiLeaks and was killed as a result. Multiple security analysts and an FBI investigation have tied the release to hackers with ties to Russia. D.C. police have said repeatedly that they think Rich was slain in a random robbery attempt.
Click to expand...

Hannity latched onto the story and pushed it on Fox News. It garnered so many complaints, Fox actually told him to can the story.

Hannity did on Fox but continued pushing the lie on his radio show.

They have since expanded on the CT which is where Seth's brother became a target of these disgusting idiots.
 
The suit has a fair-to-middling chance in my (not lawyerly) opinion. Plaintiff does not have to prove malice in cases of not-a-public-figure. There's nothing about intent/malice in such cases. All that has to be proved is that the parties made the statements, the statements were false, the parties published or broadcast or spoke the false charges for others to see, and that there were damages.

The defense is going to try to argue that he's a public figure, but in the famous case, I think it speaks of politicians and public officials,... if I'm not mistaken.


ETA: And the "actual malice" in the case of a public person might also be provable to a juror or judge. We use "malice" to mean "evil or bad intentions" but the law accepts that they knowingly published/broadcast a false statement or that they published/broadcast without giving a rat's p'toot as to whether it was true or not. The Trump Standard "Some People Are Saying" will not get you very far in the courts. They'll have to show that the had reason to believe it other than "well, it's a good story, eh?"
 
Last edited:
Reread it

Giordano said:
My reading of the link indicates that it is Seth's alive brother, Aaron Rich who is suing for the sullying of his own, Aaron Rich's reputation, etc.
Click to expand...

Nowhere in the article does it say that Aaron Rich was involved in anything. Aaron Rich is filing because there have been allegations/speculations that SETH was involved in something illegal/nefarious/questionable.

Just because the rumors are about his brother does not defame Aaron. The 'defamations' all concern SETH.

Even if Aaron's neighbors are looking at him suspiciously, it's not defamation of Aaron. It is his misfortune to be related to Seth, he's not Seth, he's not the focus of the speculation and therefore NOT defamed and not libeled and not slandered by the publications.

ETA: perhaps Seth's estate is what he should be suing.
 
Last edited:
desmirelle said:
Nowhere in the article does it say that Aaron Rich was involved in anything. Aaron Rich is filing because there have been allegations/speculations that SETH was involved in something illegal/nefarious/questionable.

Just because the rumors are about his brother does not defame Aaron. The 'defamations' all concern SETH.

Even if Aaron's neighbors are looking at him suspiciously, it's not defamation of Aaron. It is his misfortune to be related to Seth, he's not Seth, he's not the focus of the speculation and therefore NOT defamed and not libeled and not slandered by the publications.

ETA: perhaps Seth's estate is what he should be suing.
Click to expand...

Huh? What you're stating is sort of the exact opposite of correct.



Are we reading the same article? The one linked in the OP has the following:

Aaron Rich's lawsuit seeks damages for harm to his reputation and emotional distress, among other things, against Butowsky, Couch, America First Media, and The Washington Times for suggesting he played a role in the supposed email theft. The suit alleges those people and media companies pushed a conspiracy theory about Aaron Rich that used his background as a defense contractor with technical expertise to suggest he worked with his brother to leak DNC documents to Wikileaks, received money for doing so, and then worked to cover-up the crime.
"Not satisfied with the existing conspiracy theory about Seth Rich ... Defendants Ed Butowsky, Matt Couch, and America First Media have spent the past year creating and disseminating a made-up conspiracy theory that Aaron Rich was the technological know-how behind, and financial beneficiary of, Seth's operation," Michael Gottlieb, an attorney for Aaron Rich, told CNN.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
desmirelle said:
Nowhere in the article does it say that Aaron Rich was involved in anything. Aaron Rich is filing because there have been allegations/speculations that SETH was involved in something illegal/nefarious/questionable.

Just because the rumors are about his brother does not defame Aaron. The 'defamations' all concern SETH.

Even if Aaron's neighbors are looking at him suspiciously, it's not defamation of Aaron. It is his misfortune to be related to Seth, he's not Seth, he's not the focus of the speculation and therefore NOT defamed and not libeled and not slandered by the publications.

ETA: perhaps Seth's estate is what he should be suing.
Click to expand...
Please check out Foolmewunz's post because I too have no idea how you reach your conclusions. Aaron is very much the target of the conspiracy theory that he claims was concocted by the defendants and that is the basis of his legal action.
 
Just hope he wins a huge settlement that breaks the defendants forever!!!. Into little tiny pieces!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom