| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
 Posted: 04/09/16 1:10 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| mzonefan wrote: |
| GEF34 wrote: |
| So I was reading through this thread and was reading some of the articles linked here and articles I found via other links and is supposedly this relationship started before either of them were at Louisiana Tech, it is possible it started before they were every in a coach/player situation. I of course have no information on either person, but given he used to coach in AAU and the basketball community isn't exactly a big one and many people know other people, he could have known her every before her became her coach and something started before as well. That doesn't excuse him from continuing it once he became her coach, but it certainly changes the narrative that he had any type of power over her when their relationship started. |
Did you miss the part where he was her assistant coach at Marquette, and she followed him to LaTech? |
I was referring to before Marquette that's why I mentioned he coached in AAU, which is where he was before Marquette.
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8942
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 1:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Lillian Hidgepork wrote: |
| I have heard from really reliable sources that if some player is not preggie then lawsuits are getting ready to start flying. You moronic never done anything wrong idiots better be deleting your posts claiming he did and your tweets. Just saying. Slander on a national stage is a ugly business. Even if he had a relationship with a player, and you publish stuff like this thats untrue about a kid and coach, you are getting ready to pay up. Some of you have not one brain cell. And I am not defending this man either. Just telling you how stupid some of you are. |
Would I be correct in assuming you're not a lawyer?
I am dying to hear the theory for how the damages for stating the coach slept with the player and got her pregnant exceed the damage suffered for the admitted seeping with the player.
The odds that UConn was going to win the title were really high; they're nothing compared to the odds against anyone getting sued for defamation over this. |
He hasn't admitted to sleeping with a player, has he? Just to having an inappropriate relationship, right?
|
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3511
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 1:21 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
What did Mickie DeMoss know and when did she know it?
Apparently, the LaTech AD thinks she knew nothing, given that he's anointed her interim head coach.
I would be very suspicious and skeptical. The sense from the LaTech boards seems to be that this rumor was all around the team, if not much of the campus, for quite a while. Someone finally spilled some convincing beans to the AD and university president earlier this week. Who, if not the coaching staff? |
So is the entire coaching staff under suspicion and tainted for being complicit in this situation? Clearly a new HC is going to want to clean house, but does this affect the hiring of this staff elsewhere?
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7822
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 1:51 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Lillian Hidgepork wrote: |
| I have heard from really reliable sources that if some player is not preggie then lawsuits are getting ready to start flying. You moronic never done anything wrong idiots better be deleting your posts claiming he did and your tweets. Just saying. Slander on a national stage is a ugly business. Even if he had a relationship with a player, and you publish stuff like this thats untrue about a kid and coach, you are getting ready to pay up. Some of you have not one brain cell. And I am not defending this man either. Just telling you how stupid some of you are. |
Would I be correct in assuming you're not a lawyer?
I am dying to hear the theory for how the damages for stating the coach slept with the player and got her pregnant exceed the damage suffered for the admitted seeping with the player.
The odds that UConn was going to win the title were really high; they're nothing compared to the odds against anyone getting sued for defamation over this. |
He hasn't admitted to sleeping with a player, has he? Just to having an inappropriate relationship, right? |
Point made!
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 2:36 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| summertime blues wrote: |
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Lillian Hidgepork wrote: |
| I have heard from really reliable sources that if some player is not preggie then lawsuits are getting ready to start flying. You moronic never done anything wrong idiots better be deleting your posts claiming he did and your tweets. Just saying. Slander on a national stage is a ugly business. Even if he had a relationship with a player, and you publish stuff like this thats untrue about a kid and coach, you are getting ready to pay up. Some of you have not one brain cell. And I am not defending this man either. Just telling you how stupid some of you are. |
Would I be correct in assuming you're not a lawyer?
I am dying to hear the theory for how the damages for stating the coach slept with the player and got her pregnant exceed the damage suffered for the admitted seeping with the player.
The odds that UConn was going to win the title were really high; they're nothing compared to the odds against anyone getting sued for defamation over this. |
He hasn't admitted to sleeping with a player, has he? Just to having an inappropriate relationship, right? |
Point made! |
No point made. It's not in dispute the relationship was with a player, is it? Can't bring a defamation case over that. So the same question remains. What's the theory and measure for the the marginal damages for adding "and she's pregnant" over just saying "he slept with a player"? I'm still waiting.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7822
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 2:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Lillian Hidgepork wrote: |
| I have heard from really reliable sources that if some player is not preggie then lawsuits are getting ready to start flying. You moronic never done anything wrong idiots better be deleting your posts claiming he did and your tweets. Just saying. Slander on a national stage is a ugly business. Even if he had a relationship with a player, and you publish stuff like this thats untrue about a kid and coach, you are getting ready to pay up. Some of you have not one brain cell. And I am not defending this man either. Just telling you how stupid some of you are. |
Would I be correct in assuming you're not a lawyer?
I am dying to hear the theory for how the damages for stating the coach slept with the player and got her pregnant exceed the damage suffered for the admitted seeping with the player.
The odds that UConn was going to win the title were really high; they're nothing compared to the odds against anyone getting sued for defamation over this. |
He hasn't admitted to sleeping with a player, has he? Just to having an inappropriate relationship, right? |
Point made! |
No point made. It's not in dispute the relationship was with a player, is it? Can't bring a defamation case over that. So the same question remains. What's the theory and measure for the the marginal damages for adding "and she's pregnant" over just saying "he slept with a player"? I'm still waiting. |
"Inappropriate relationship" does not mean anyone slept with anyone. Any pregnancy, real or rumored is quite aside from that. You are ASSuming things from rumors.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 2:48 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| summertime blues wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Lillian Hidgepork wrote: |
| I have heard from really reliable sources that if some player is not preggie then lawsuits are getting ready to start flying. You moronic never done anything wrong idiots better be deleting your posts claiming he did and your tweets. Just saying. Slander on a national stage is a ugly business. Even if he had a relationship with a player, and you publish stuff like this thats untrue about a kid and coach, you are getting ready to pay up. Some of you have not one brain cell. And I am not defending this man either. Just telling you how stupid some of you are. |
Would I be correct in assuming you're not a lawyer?
I am dying to hear the theory for how the damages for stating the coach slept with the player and got her pregnant exceed the damage suffered for the admitted seeping with the player.
The odds that UConn was going to win the title were really high; they're nothing compared to the odds against anyone getting sued for defamation over this. |
He hasn't admitted to sleeping with a player, has he? Just to having an inappropriate relationship, right? |
Point made! |
No point made. It's not in dispute the relationship was with a player, is it? Can't bring a defamation case over that. So the same question remains. What's the theory and measure for the the marginal damages for adding "and she's pregnant" over just saying "he slept with a player"? I'm still waiting. |
"Inappropriate relationship" does not mean anyone slept with anyone. Any pregnancy, real or rumored is quite aside from that. You are ASSuming things from rumors. |
Right. And I thought it would be hard to top the "you're all going to get sued" post. I obviously underestimated.
|
|
NoDakSt
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 4929
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 2:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| This has to be so bizarre for DeMoss. You watch this kid grow up all most firsthand.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 2:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| NoDakSt wrote: |
| This has to be so bizarre for DeMoss. You watch this kid grow up all most firsthand. |
Seriously, if she is even remotely as close to him as is always claimed, what's the likelihood she didn't know or strongly suspect what was going on and simply looked the other way?
|
|
TotalCardinalMove
Joined: 13 Oct 2013
Posts: 1466
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 3:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| In journalism, you only report facts. So unless you know for sure the player is pregnant, you then report it. You can't just publish a piece saying she's pregnant without substantial evidence backing your claim. If the said player isn't actually pregnant, she can pursue some type of legal action for defamation and slander. Which is why in cases like these, you hold out publishing names, until you know for sure the allegations are correct.
|
|
Durantula
Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 5223
Back to top |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 4:25 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| In journalism, you only report facts. So unless you know for sure the player is pregnant, you then report it. You can't just publish a piece saying she's pregnant without substantial evidence backing your claim. If the said player isn't actually pregnant, she can pursue some type of legal action for defamation and slander. Which is why in cases like these, you hold out publishing names, until you know for sure the allegations are correct. |
Actually that's likely not correct. It may violate journalistic ethics (to the extent such a concept even exists in this age of the internet) but as a legal matter the First Amendment protects the media and thus a public figure claiming defamation must prove that the defamatory statements were made with actual malice. That the statements were untrue, or unsupported or negligent is not enough.
You might want to go read about New York Time v. Sullivan and its progeny.
Certainly Summitt, and probably the girl, are both public figures in this context.
And even in the unlikely situation that she could establish a claim for defamation, I'm still waiting to hear what the theory is for her having suffered damages for having it reported she is pregnant over and above those for it being reported that she had the affair.
I'm dying to hear that theory and measure.
|
|
miller40
Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 1334
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 4:29 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
After reading this, I don't know how the coaching staff couldn't have at least suspected anything.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 4:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
That article was incoherent to me. Santos and Pumroy were friends. That's why they both went to La Tech. Santos was complaining about favoritism? I doubt it.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7822
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 4:33 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Shades wrote: |
That article was incoherent to me. Santos and Pumroy were friends. That's why they both went to La Tech. Santos was complaining about favoritism? I doubt it. |
Perhaps the keyword is "were"?
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
NoDakSt
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 4929
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 4:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| summertime blues wrote: |
| Shades wrote: |
That article was incoherent to me. Santos and Pumroy were friends. That's why they both went to La Tech. Santos was complaining about favoritism? I doubt it. |
Perhaps the keyword is "were"? |
Sounds like the rest of the coaching staff were aware that something was amiss but perhaps not to what degree or extent.
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 4:45 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| NoDakSt wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
| Shades wrote: |
That article was incoherent to me. Santos and Pumroy were friends. That's why they both went to La Tech. Santos was complaining about favoritism? I doubt it. |
Perhaps the keyword is "were"? |
Sounds like the rest of the coaching staff were aware that something was amiss but perhaps not to what degree or extent. |
That would only be if they also believed the player was getting favorable treatment. If they agreed she should have the green light, should be given more leeway for whatever reason, just because the players believe there is favoritism going on doesn't mean the coaches agreed.
I don't know much about the team, coaches, players, etc., but just because members of the team complained it doesn't mean the coaching staff should suspect anything out of the ordinary, unless part of the complain was they think they are having a relationship more than just coach/player.
|
|
TotalCardinalMove
Joined: 13 Oct 2013
Posts: 1466
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 4:47 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| In journalism, you only report facts. So unless you know for sure the player is pregnant, you then report it. You can't just publish a piece saying she's pregnant without substantial evidence backing your claim. If the said player isn't actually pregnant, she can pursue some type of legal action for defamation and slander. Which is why in cases like these, you hold out publishing names, until you know for sure the allegations are correct. |
Actually that's likely not correct. It may violate journalistic ethics (to the extent such a concept even exists in this age of the internet) but as a legal matter the First Amendment protects the media and thus a public figure claiming defamation must prove that the defamatory statements were made with actual malice. That the statements were untrue, or unsupported or negligent is not enough.
You might want to go read about New York Time v. Sullivan and its progeny.
Certainly Summitt, and probably the girl, are both public figures in this context.
And even in the unlikely situation that she could establish a claim for defamation, I'm still waiting to hear what the theory is for her having suffered damages for having it reported she is pregnant over and above those for it being reported that she had the affair.
I'm dying to hear that theory and measure. |
Again, you only report facts. It doesn't matter if you're a public feature or not. Some of the most well known celebrities have sued tabloids for publishing false information and fabricating truths. And a lot of times, the celebrities either won the case or the two parties came to a settlement. Attaching someone's name to false information, public figure or not, is liable to some sort of consequence. I will say, if you're a big figure it would be harder than your average Joe, but it's happened before.
I also wouldn't consider the player a public figure. She's still just a college student that happens to play basketball.
Also, Summitt admitted to an inappropriate relationship, the pregnancy is just rampant rumor and speculation. Media outlets then started reporting she's pregnant. We don't know that. If the player were to sue, how is the author of the piece going to prove the credibility of the source if they swore to the source not to reveal their identity? Often, the judge will not allow you to use some anonymous source as defense, because quite frankly the judge wouldn't know if the source actually exists. For all we know, the "sources" could just be random college kids trying to get a few bucks off the story.
Unless the player herself (or someone she gave approval to) came forward and said she's pregnant, then don't report. If it turns out not true, whichever outlets started saying she's pregnant better have some reliable sources and evidence to back their claims.
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 4:59 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| In journalism, you only report facts. So unless you know for sure the player is pregnant, you then report it. You can't just publish a piece saying she's pregnant without substantial evidence backing your claim. If the said player isn't actually pregnant, she can pursue some type of legal action for defamation and slander. Which is why in cases like these, you hold out publishing names, until you know for sure the allegations are correct. |
Actually that's likely not correct. It may violate journalistic ethics (to the extent such a concept even exists in this age of the internet) but as a legal matter the First Amendment protects the media and thus a public figure claiming defamation must prove that the defamatory statements were made with actual malice. That the statements were untrue, or unsupported or negligent is not enough.
You might want to go read about New York Time v. Sullivan and its progeny.
Certainly Summitt, and probably the girl, are both public figures in this context.
And even in the unlikely situation that she could establish a claim for defamation, I'm still waiting to hear what the theory is for her having suffered damages for having it reported she is pregnant over and above those for it being reported that she had the affair.
I'm dying to hear that theory and measure. |
Again, you only report facts. It doesn't matter if you're a public feature or not. Some of the most well known celebrities have sued tabloids for publishing false information and fabricating truths. And a lot of times, the celebrities either won the case or the two parties came to a settlement. Attaching someone's name to false information, public figure or not, is liable to some sort of consequence. I will say, if you're a big figure it would be harder than your average Joe, but it's happened before.
I also wouldn't consider the player a public figure. She's still just a college student that happens to play basketball.
Also, Summitt admitted to an inappropriate relationship, the pregnancy is just rampant rumor and speculation. Media outlets then started reporting she's pregnant. We don't know that. If the player were to sue, how is the author of the piece going to prove the credibility of the source if they swore to the source not to reveal their identity? Often, the judge will not allow you to use some anonymous source as defense, because quite frankly the judge wouldn't know if the source actually exists. For all we know, the "sources" could just be random college kids trying to get a few bucks off the story.
Unless the player herself (or someone she gave approval to) came forward and said she's pregnant, then don't report. If it turns out not true, whichever outlets started saying she's pregnant better have some reliable sources and evidence to back their claims. |
Doesn't the person suing have to prove the person reporting knowingly reported false information, if the person reporting the information believes it to be true, even if it's not I don't think the person can sue without proving it was knowingly false when it was reported.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7822
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 4:59 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
You know, this is all playing out in a rather interesting manner, with some very interesting undertones. One begins to wonder if Ms. Santos isn't the one stirring the pot here.......and if there may be more than a little jealousy involved. Not that this excuses Tyler, but is it possible that she could have started the more vicious rumors? They came together from Marquette as friends, she may have thought she would get equal attention and/or equal playing time, she didn't, she got jealous...it's entirely possible she might have been the inciter of dissension on the team.....stranger things have happened. She certainly has gone out of her way to disassociate herself from her former friend.
Just a thought.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
Last edited by summertime blues on 04/09/16 5:15 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
TotalCardinalMove
Joined: 13 Oct 2013
Posts: 1466
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 5:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GEF34 wrote: |
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| In journalism, you only report facts. So unless you know for sure the player is pregnant, you then report it. You can't just publish a piece saying she's pregnant without substantial evidence backing your claim. If the said player isn't actually pregnant, she can pursue some type of legal action for defamation and slander. Which is why in cases like these, you hold out publishing names, until you know for sure the allegations are correct. |
Actually that's likely not correct. It may violate journalistic ethics (to the extent such a concept even exists in this age of the internet) but as a legal matter the First Amendment protects the media and thus a public figure claiming defamation must prove that the defamatory statements were made with actual malice. That the statements were untrue, or unsupported or negligent is not enough.
You might want to go read about New York Time v. Sullivan and its progeny.
Certainly Summitt, and probably the girl, are both public figures in this context.
And even in the unlikely situation that she could establish a claim for defamation, I'm still waiting to hear what the theory is for her having suffered damages for having it reported she is pregnant over and above those for it being reported that she had the affair.
I'm dying to hear that theory and measure. |
Again, you only report facts. It doesn't matter if you're a public feature or not. Some of the most well known celebrities have sued tabloids for publishing false information and fabricating truths. And a lot of times, the celebrities either won the case or the two parties came to a settlement. Attaching someone's name to false information, public figure or not, is liable to some sort of consequence. I will say, if you're a big figure it would be harder than your average Joe, but it's happened before.
I also wouldn't consider the player a public figure. She's still just a college student that happens to play basketball.
Also, Summitt admitted to an inappropriate relationship, the pregnancy is just rampant rumor and speculation. Media outlets then started reporting she's pregnant. We don't know that. If the player were to sue, how is the author of the piece going to prove the credibility of the source if they swore to the source not to reveal their identity? Often, the judge will not allow you to use some anonymous source as defense, because quite frankly the judge wouldn't know if the source actually exists. For all we know, the "sources" could just be random college kids trying to get a few bucks off the story.
Unless the player herself (or someone she gave approval to) came forward and said she's pregnant, then don't report. If it turns out not true, whichever outlets started saying she's pregnant better have some reliable sources and evidence to back their claims. |
Doesn't the person suing have to prove the person reporting knowingly reported false information, if the person reporting the information believes it to be true, even if it's not I don't think the person can sue without proving it was knowingly false when it was reported. |
Well if you're unsure of your source credibility, it's probably best to not report it. However, if you choose to report it, which I wouldn't, you use "alleged" "reported" "thought". You don't say the girl is 100% pregnant if you don't know for sure. That's just proper journalism.
It's just like a crime case. You don't report "man murders mother of two" until it has been convicted that way. Until there's a legal decision, you report "man allegedly kills mother of two".
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 5:07 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| In journalism, you only report facts. So unless you know for sure the player is pregnant, you then report it. You can't just publish a piece saying she's pregnant without substantial evidence backing your claim. If the said player isn't actually pregnant, she can pursue some type of legal action for defamation and slander. Which is why in cases like these, you hold out publishing names, until you know for sure the allegations are correct. |
Actually that's likely not correct. It may violate journalistic ethics (to the extent such a concept even exists in this age of the internet) but as a legal matter the First Amendment protects the media and thus a public figure claiming defamation must prove that the defamatory statements were made with actual malice. That the statements were untrue, or unsupported or negligent is not enough.
You might want to go read about New York Time v. Sullivan and its progeny.
Certainly Summitt, and probably the girl, are both public figures in this context.
And even in the unlikely situation that she could establish a claim for defamation, I'm still waiting to hear what the theory is for her having suffered damages for having it reported she is pregnant over and above those for it being reported that she had the affair.
I'm dying to hear that theory and measure. |
Again, you only report facts. It doesn't matter if you're a public feature or not. Some of the most well known celebrities have sued tabloids for publishing false information and fabricating truths. And a lot of times, the celebrities either won the case or the two parties came to a settlement. Attaching someone's name to false information, public figure or not, is liable to some sort of consequence. I will say, if you're a big figure it would be harder than your average Joe, but it's happened before.
I also wouldn't consider the player a public figure. She's still just a college student that happens to play basketball.
Also, Summitt admitted to an inappropriate relationship, the pregnancy is just rampant rumor and speculation. Media outlets then started reporting she's pregnant. We don't know that. If the player were to sue, how is the author of the piece going to prove the credibility of the source if they swore to the source not to reveal their identity? Often, the judge will not allow you to use some anonymous source as defense, because quite frankly the judge wouldn't know if the source actually exists. For all we know, the "sources" could just be random college kids trying to get a few bucks off the story.
Unless the player herself (or someone she gave approval to) came forward and said she's pregnant, then don't report. If it turns out not true, whichever outlets started saying she's pregnant better have some reliable sources and evidence to back their claims. |
Sorry, but that's simply not a correct statement of the law.
Last edited by ArtBest23 on 04/09/16 5:13 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
TotalCardinalMove
Joined: 13 Oct 2013
Posts: 1466
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 5:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| summertime blues wrote: |
You know, this is all playing out in a rather interesting manner, with some very interesting undertones. One begins to wonder if Ms. Santos isn't the one stirring the pot here.......and if there may be more than a little jealousy involved. Not that this excuses Tyler, but is it possible that she could have started the more vicious rumors? They came together from Marquette as friends, she may have thought she would get equal attention and/or equal playing time, she didn't, she got jealous...it's entirely possible she might have been the inciter of dissension on the team.....stranger things have happened. She certainly has gone out of her way to dissociate herself from her former friend.
Just a thought. |
I remember reading an older article about the pair transferring. Pumroy said it was actually Santos' idea to move. Pumroy said she was comfortable at Marquette until Santos brought up the transfer idea. Interesting thought.
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 5:11 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| GEF34 wrote: |
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| In journalism, you only report facts. So unless you know for sure the player is pregnant, you then report it. You can't just publish a piece saying she's pregnant without substantial evidence backing your claim. If the said player isn't actually pregnant, she can pursue some type of legal action for defamation and slander. Which is why in cases like these, you hold out publishing names, until you know for sure the allegations are correct. |
Actually that's likely not correct. It may violate journalistic ethics (to the extent such a concept even exists in this age of the internet) but as a legal matter the First Amendment protects the media and thus a public figure claiming defamation must prove that the defamatory statements were made with actual malice. That the statements were untrue, or unsupported or negligent is not enough.
You might want to go read about New York Time v. Sullivan and its progeny.
Certainly Summitt, and probably the girl, are both public figures in this context.
And even in the unlikely situation that she could establish a claim for defamation, I'm still waiting to hear what the theory is for her having suffered damages for having it reported she is pregnant over and above those for it being reported that she had the affair.
I'm dying to hear that theory and measure. |
Again, you only report facts. It doesn't matter if you're a public feature or not. Some of the most well known celebrities have sued tabloids for publishing false information and fabricating truths. And a lot of times, the celebrities either won the case or the two parties came to a settlement. Attaching someone's name to false information, public figure or not, is liable to some sort of consequence. I will say, if you're a big figure it would be harder than your average Joe, but it's happened before.
I also wouldn't consider the player a public figure. She's still just a college student that happens to play basketball.
Also, Summitt admitted to an inappropriate relationship, the pregnancy is just rampant rumor and speculation. Media outlets then started reporting she's pregnant. We don't know that. If the player were to sue, how is the author of the piece going to prove the credibility of the source if they swore to the source not to reveal their identity? Often, the judge will not allow you to use some anonymous source as defense, because quite frankly the judge wouldn't know if the source actually exists. For all we know, the "sources" could just be random college kids trying to get a few bucks off the story.
Unless the player herself (or someone she gave approval to) came forward and said she's pregnant, then don't report. If it turns out not true, whichever outlets started saying she's pregnant better have some reliable sources and evidence to back their claims. |
Doesn't the person suing have to prove the person reporting knowingly reported false information, if the person reporting the information believes it to be true, even if it's not I don't think the person can sue without proving it was knowingly false when it was reported. |
Well if you're unsure of your source credibility, it's probably best to not report it. However, if you choose to report it, which I wouldn't, you use "alleged" "reported" "thought". You don't say the girl is 100% pregnant if you don't know for sure. That's just proper journalism.
It's just like a crime case. You don't report "man murders mother of two" until it has been convicted that way. Until there's a legal decision, you report "man allegedly kills mother of two". |
It may be bad journalism, but it doesn't make it a crime that a person can be sued for and found guilty of. Well technically a person can sue for it because a person can sue for anything, but it doesn't mean they will win in a court of law.
|
|
TotalCardinalMove
Joined: 13 Oct 2013
Posts: 1466
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/16 5:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| In journalism, you only report facts. So unless you know for sure the player is pregnant, you then report it. You can't just publish a piece saying she's pregnant without substantial evidence backing your claim. If the said player isn't actually pregnant, she can pursue some type of legal action for defamation and slander. Which is why in cases like these, you hold out publishing names, until you know for sure the allegations are correct. |
Actually that's likely not correct. It may violate journalistic ethics (to the extent such a concept even exists in this age of the internet) but as a legal matter the First Amendment protects the media and thus a public figure claiming defamation must prove that the defamatory statements were made with actual malice. That the statements were untrue, or unsupported or negligent is not enough.
You might want to go read about New York Time v. Sullivan and its progeny.
Certainly Summitt, and probably the girl, are both public figures in this context.
And even in the unlikely situation that she could establish a claim for defamation, I'm still waiting to hear what the theory is for her having suffered damages for having it reported she is pregnant over and above those for it being reported that she had the affair.
I'm dying to hear that theory and measure. |
Again, you only report facts. It doesn't matter if you're a public feature or not. Some of the most well known celebrities have sued tabloids for publishing false information and fabricating truths. And a lot of times, the celebrities either won the case or the two parties came to a settlement. Attaching someone's name to false information, public figure or not, is liable to some sort of consequence. I will say, if you're a big figure it would be harder than your average Joe, but it's happened before.
I also wouldn't consider the player a public figure. She's still just a college student that happens to play basketball.
Also, Summitt admitted to an inappropriate relationship, the pregnancy is just rampant rumor and speculation. Media outlets then started reporting she's pregnant. We don't know that. If the player were to sue, how is the author of the piece going to prove the credibility of the source if they swore to the source not to reveal their identity? Often, the judge will not allow you to use some anonymous source as defense, because quite frankly the judge wouldn't know if the source actually exists. For all we know, the "sources" could just be random college kids trying to get a few bucks off the story.
Unless the player herself (or someone she gave approval to) came forward and said she's pregnant, then don't report. If it turns out not true, whichever outlets started saying she's pregnant better have some reliable sources and evidence to back their claims. |
Sorry, but that's simply not a correct statement if he law. |
Well, I suggest you do some more research. Making up false stories about an individual can lead to consequences, and often does. Tyler only admitted to having the inappropriate relationship. Where did the "he got her pregnant" stories come from? It hasn't been proven, so you don't report it that way.
|
|
|
|
