Home

[GLOCK]

It can definitely be proved that it caused harm.
And I'm sure that if he goes to interview for any job the interviewers will remember his face and deny him of the position because of the infamy

Wow! He's gonna be LOADED

[D.I.E.G.O.]

If he gets the right lawyer, then he will be STACKING hun. Negligence will be easy to prove, so he will certainly win damages for that.

[FlowerBomb]

[instagram]

View this post on Instagram

[/instagram]

[Vonc2002]

sddddddddddddddds
Those women

[KING BENTLEY.]

sddddddddddddddds
Those women

sssssssssssssssssss

[❄️☃️🌨� Shuji Feels Different 🌨�☃️❄️]

bbb

Defamation of character claims require you to prove two things: 1. that what was said is completely untrue. 2. that the party(ies) who made such claims made them in an effort to cause harm.

The second part is what makes this form of tort law so damn complicated and difficult to prove.

Which is why it would be foolish to bring the action for defamation as opposed to libel. The libel is easy to spot. His face was plastered all across the world in the print and electronic media, what was stated was untrue and it caused harm to his character and potentially physical harm. The standards and requirements are much higher for defamation of character, although a libel IS a form of defamation.  There are exceptions to the requirement of malicious intent for defamation as well. If the statement was so vicious and reckless on its face, then a malicious intent would be inferred.

I see the Police Department using a defense of Public Safety to try to weasel their way out of any potential lawsuits, but I hope they do the right thing and settle with the guy.

[Admin]