Jump to content

Zimmerman is suing Al Sharpton, NBC, and the Martin family's attorneys


Casper

Recommended Posts

Does the article say what damages he's claiming?

You can't sue without actual damages. I don't see this going anywhere unless he can demonstrate that he was damaged financially by the news media, and not simply by his own actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the article says is "IF Zimmerman was treated for emotional trauma," he'll receive compensation for treatment and damages.

But that means he needs to have seen a doctor and demonstrated a physical manifestation of symptoms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the article say what damages he's claiming?

You can't sue without actual damages. I don't see this going anywhere unless he can demonstrate that he was damaged financially by the news media, and not simply by his own actions.

How about the slandering of his character? I am not sure about his financial or job situation but do you think anyone would hire him with all of this going on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the article say what damages he's claiming?

You can't sue without actual damages. I don't see this going anywhere unless he can demonstrate that he was damaged financially by the news media, and not simply by his own actions.

The furor meant he had to quit his job and go into hiding for his own safety. Demonstrable financial harm here would be the difference in cost associated with travel between his place of hiding and the court (versus traveling from his home), costs of lodging where he is now, any security measure he has had to implement (bodyguards, securing the building he is living in etc).

Loss of income from to having to quit his job due to his safety being jeapordized by the actions that form the basis of the tort is definitely recoverable if the judge so rules.

Intentional infliction of emotional distress is not something you can put a dollar figure on.

This lawsuit is a little premature - it will stand much better chance of success if he is found not guilty. Even more so if the case is dismissed. Nobody wants to give this guy money then see him subsequently convicted.

Spike Lee needs to get sued too - he's the guy who retweeted a child's home address (Wrong George Zimmerman) and drove a family from their home due to death threats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That article has almost as much bias as typos. :nono:

Having said that, I believe that the basic concept is solid - that NBC, Sharpton and the Martin attorneys have created a racial element to this case that never existed. I believe that they did this for their own personal gain, and ignored the damage that is being done to Zimmerman, the community and to the coutry as a whole. I also know that uninvolved people are suffering physical assaults as a result of that racial tension - those people should sue too.

I don't know if Zimmerman is guilty of murder, however there is no evidence of any racial component (and overwhelming evidence that he is not a racist at all).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not a news article so much as it is an editorial, and nowhere does it actually say that Zimmerman has filed suit. It describes the tort offenses that Zimmerman might base a lawsuit on.

Interesting. The badly-written opinion article in the OP (written by Zimmermans' personal cheerleader, apparently) said we was "reportedly" going to sue, but gave no cite or reference to substantiate that assertion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Murder and money! Scandal of the century...

Give it a few years and this will be the title of a documentary presented on the investigation discovery channel.

Haters gunna hate, im obviously gunna get bashed for my opinion on this, but I just want to say who are you to judge what I think? If this was Arizona you would be more polite :lol:

Im j/k bring in the basing, I have nothing better to do right now than argue my OPINION.

Zimmermann, I hope you burn in hell :sheepfucker: yes im atheist, no I dont believe in heaven/hell. Its a figure of speach for those of you that follow me so closely on what I have said in other threads(you know who you are)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the article say what damages he's claiming?

You can't sue without actual damages. I don't see this going anywhere unless he can demonstrate that he was damaged financially by the news media, and not simply by his own actions.

Bingo. Scruit's correct to a point, but at the end of the day you have to be physically (easy to prove) or SEVERLY mentally damaged (not easy to prove) to reach the point where remuneration is in order.

Unless....

^^^^ This.

This article is editorial supposition, to date there is no lawsuit from Zimmerman against those described in this article. It's all just a "what if".

...it was all bullshit to begin with and an effort by some hack to fill column space.

However, now that the conversation is out... :)

You can just ask the Duke Lacrosse boys ('member them?) how far they got suing Nancy Grace and CNN. Spoiler alert: Nada. Their civil case is still ongoing against the city of Durham and Duke University, however. As for their accuser, Crystal Mangum? In jail, on trial for the murder of her boyfriend in 2011.

Here's one more, this one with even closer parallels. Remember Tawana Brawley? Here's a refresher. One of the accused "perps" in this case, Steven Pagones, sued Sharpton and the other major talking heads for defamation. He ended up getting $395,000 (he asked for 395M) almost 10 YEARS after the original incident. Sharpton paid his end just like he paid all the others, through his "foundation".

In short, this guy's going to get bupkiss if anything at all, and if he is lucky enough to get anything it's going to take decades to sort out and collect. Tack that fact onto the fact that he would be suing huge media magnates that have basically infinite legal resources, and he's better off going outside to yell at a cloud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. The badly-written opinion article in the OP (written by Zimmermans' personal cheerleader, apparently) said we was "reportedly" going to sue, but gave no cite or reference to substantiate that assertion.

Agreed. I mistakenly assumed "reportedly" meant it was happening.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure "I had to quit my job" is going to just be an accepted "damage."

If he'd been fired, or his employer vouches for the fact that they were aware of threats to his safety while on the job, then he's got a case; but quitting because you're scared isn't something Al Sharpton proximately caused. Besides, unless there is a direct call to violence, you can't punish the speaker for the actions of others.

Al Sharpton's opinion is protected speech until he actually suggests that people hurt or harass Zimmerman. Simply making him look bad with information that the news is reporting isn't a crime. If it were, then news media would be getting sued all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...