Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Nicholas Sandmann Sues CNN – Read the Complaint with Exhibits

    Nicholas Sandmann Sues CNN – Read the Complaint with Exhibits

    “CNN’s vicious attack on Nicholas included at least four (4) defamatory television broadcasts and nine (9) defamatory online articles…”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JMkzakXgIY

    Nicholas Sandmann, the Covington, Kentucky teen maligned by the media, has filed his second lawsuit.

    The first lawsuit was against The Washington Post, Covington teen Nicholas Sandmann sues The Washington Post for defamation:

    You know the story of the Covington Catholic High School kids who were maligned by the media when Native American activist Nathan Phillips, accompanied by a phalanx of videographers, approached them to create a confrontation.

    Nicholas Sandmann did nothing other than stand there as Phillips invaded his personal space and banged a drum inches from Sandmann’s face. The fact that Sandmann was wearing a MAGA hat infuriated liberal media and social media. That Sandmann smiled during the encounter was called a “white privileged” smirk, and led to taunts from some famous people that he should be punched in the face.

    When the full video came out, it became clear that Sandmann was the victim in this encounter, not the aggressor. There were some apologies, but for the most part the media that had tarred and feathered Sandmann did nothing to clean up the mess they made.

    Sandmann has hired high profile lawyer Linn Wood from Atlanta, and Todd McMurty from Mitchell, KY. Document preservation demands were sent to dozens of media entities and celebrities. Now suit has been filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Kentucky for defamation.

    You can read the Complaint and exhibits at the lawyers’ website. The Complaint also is here in pdf.

    I expressed questions and doubts about whether Sandmann’s lawsuit against WaPo would survive a motion to dismiss:

    I’ve read the Complaint, but it is hard to find specific false statements about Sandmann. As the Complaint states many times, Sandmann relies on the alleged ” false and defamatory gist” of WaPo’s coverage (that phrase appears 24 times). Many of the statements attributed to WaPo that contributed to this gist are the repetition of statements from Phillips and others as part of the news coverage that create the impression (sometimes explicitly so) that the students (and by implication Sandmann) were the aggressors. I wonder, though, whether those conclusions by WaPo were opinions as a legal matter and thus protected by the First Amendment.

    So my gut is telling me there may be some legal problems surviving a motion to dismiss. I’ll be looking for solid legal analysis by others on this. If you find any analysis that’s not just wishful thinking, please post in the comments.

    A new case has been filed, this time against CNN. The Complaint (pdf.) is embedded in full at the bottom of this post.

    Here are some of the key allegations:

    11. Between January 19 and January 25, 2019, CNN brought down the full force of its corporate power, influence, and wealth on Nicholas by falsely attacking, vilifying, and bullying him despite the fact that he was a minor child.

    12. Contrary to its “Facts First” public relations ploy, CNN ignored the facts and put its anti-Trump agenda first in waging a 7-day media campaign of false, vicious attacks against Nicholas, a young boy who was guilty of little more than wearing a souvenir Make America Great Again cap while on a high school field trip to the National Mall in Washington, D.C. to attend the January 18 March for Life.

    13. CNN’s vicious attack on Nicholas included at least four (4) defamatory television broadcasts and nine (9) defamatory online articles falsely accusing Nicholas and his Covington Catholic High School (“CovCath”) classmates of, among other things, engaging in racist conduct by instigating a threatening confrontation with several African American men (“the Black Hebrew Israelites”) and subsequently instigating a threatening confrontation with Native Americans who were in the midst of prayer following the Indigenous Peoples March at the National Mall.

    14. More specifically, CNN falsely asserted that Nicholas and his CovCath classmates were in a “racis[t]” “mob mentality” and “looked like they were going to lynch” the Black Hebrew Israelites who were merely “preaching about the Bible nearby” “because they didn’t like the color of their skin” and “their religious views,” and that Nicholas and his classmates then “surrounded” one of the Native Americans, 64-year old Nathan Phillips, creating “a really dangerous situation” during which Nicholas “blocked [Phillips’] escape” when Phillips tried “to leave” the mob, causing Phillips to “fear for his safety and the safety of those with him,” while Nicholas and his classmates “harassed and taunted” him.

    15. In short, the false and defamatory gist of CNN’s collective reporting conveyed to its viewers and readers that Nicholas was the face of an unruly hate mob of hundreds of white racist high school students who physically assaulted, harassed, and taunted two different minority groups engaged in peaceful demonstrations, preaching, song, and prayer.

    * * *

    36. In order to fully compensate Nicholas for the reputational harm, emotional distress, and mental anguish caused by CNN’s false attacks, this action seeks compensatory damages in excess of Seventy-Five Million Dollars ($75,000,000.00).

    37. In order to punish and to deter CNN from ever again engaging in false, reckless, malicious, and agenda-driven attacks against children in violation of well recognized journalistic standards and ethics, this action seeks punitive damages in excess of Two Hundred Million Dollars ($200,000,000.00).

    I have the same questions about the legal sufficiency of the CNN case as the WaPo case.

    There is no doubt that Nicholas Sandmann was maligned and treated horribly by the media, including WaPo and CNN. But the legal landscape is very friendly to the press, so we’ll have to see how this unfolds in court.

    ———-

    Nicholas Sandmann v. CNN – Complaint (With Exhibits) by Legal Insurrection on Scribd

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Comments



     
     0 
     
     3
    Shadow5 | March 13, 2019 at 9:36 am

    Before posting I tryed finding some citations of sucessful suits against tht MSM. While I am not a lawyer, I prefer to have citations to back my opinions.
    It is alarming how little there is on successful litigation against the MSM. (Most are found outside the U.S. court system.)
    So maybe it’s time for people to get behind a lawsuit of this nature.
    I know the argument: “But this could have a chilling effect on Freedom of the Press.” I disagree. Holding the media accountable (from whatever source) would make for a more honest presentation of the news.
    Unchecked power corrupts. But thats just my opinion.


     
     1 
     
     1
    Valerie | March 13, 2019 at 10:52 am

    Like Brown v. Board of Education, people of ill will have taken New York Times v. Sullivan and run with it.

    Brown was the infamous school bussing case that was used to justify 3-hour commutes for young school children. It was a real shock to read the opinion and find the footnote that was the purported origin for that mess.

    New York Times v. Sullivan has been similarly abused, stretched to the point that our traditional “news” media no longer even pretends to report anything but opinion. The result has become “news” articles about the content of upcoming Congressional hearing testimony that is nothing but wishful thinking by partisans. The “news” article gets contradicted the next day, and without follow-up reporting, there is no correction. And so we have the Speaker of the House giving tutorials on the uses of the “wrap-up smear.”

    Sullivan should not apply in the present case, because the plaintiff did not seek any publicity but was ambushed, and furthermore is under age. The shadow cast by that opinion and its progeny, however, is pernicious.


     
     0 
     
     0
    5under3 | March 13, 2019 at 11:25 am

    What if during discovery Sandmann’s lawyers find an email chain where it shows the editorial team knew the greater context and intentionally published the story to tell the edited narrative they wanted to be true? I guess my question is from the actual published article you may not be able to prove defamation, but could there be other evidence that would show the publishers true intentions that could lead to a conviction?


     
     0 
     
     2
    LukeHandCool | March 13, 2019 at 12:54 pm

    I remember in junior high school we had “Backwards Day.”

    Your class schedule was reversed for the day. The girls asked the boys to the dance. (Oh, those old, binary gender days.) Etc., etc.

    I’ve long thought that journalists are more like slimy politicians than slimy politicians are like slimy politicians.

    When caught pushing pure narrative and opinion, they go from dogged and determined seekers of the truth to shy and shrinking shaders of truth.

    It would be great to have just one day a year (maybe a national holiday), when the roles are reversed and the politicians get to badger the journalists and expose the unsavory details of their lives. And just concoct whole partisan narratives and push them as the plain truth.


     
     1 
     
     1
    Vladtheimp | March 13, 2019 at 7:51 pm

    If the Professor’s points about the insufficiency of the lawsuit are correct, which they may well be, then no American is protected from being maligned by a powerful, malign, lawsuit-immune, politically biased media and a Supreme Court re-examination of their cases on the subject is a necessity. Legislation would be the better way to address the issue but since the media is in the pocket of Democrats (or vice -versa)that is not a viable option.

    What a shame that the Democrats are willing to destroy all protections of normal Americans to achieve power and ‘transform’ America – this is the germination of the seeds planted by Obama.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend