111 replies to this topic

[+Blank]

Quote

By JEFF KAROUB
DETROIT — A jury on Thursday awarded a gay University of Michigan student body president $4.5 million in his lawsuit against a former Michigan assistant attorney general who posted about him in an anti-gay blog.

The U.S. District Court jury ruled in favor of Christopher Armstrong, who claimed he suffered distress after a blog created by Andrew Shirvell accused him of enticing minors with alcohol and recruiting people to become homosexual.

"I'm just incredibly humbled by what happened today," Armstrong told The Associated Press. "This is truly a victory — not just for myself, but for a lot of other kids out there."

Shirvell, who was representing himself, said the jury award was "grossly excessive" for what was "clearly protected speech ... and activity."

"This should have been thrown out," he said, adding that he plans to appeal. "Juries give short shrift to First Amendment rights."

Armstrong accused Shirvell of defamation as well as emotional distress for his actions on the blog, in Facebook posts and during visits to the Ann Arbor campus.

Then-Attorney General Mike Cox fired Shirvell in 2010 after Shirvell criticized Armstrong, who graduated last year.

Shirvell has said he viewed his blog "as a movement to get" Armstrong to resign. Shirvell argued he was acting within his First Amendment rights and that his statements were either true or protected because of Armstrong's role as a public figure.

Armstrong's attorney, Deborah Gordon, had said she would drop the lawsuit if Shirvell apologized and retracted his comments. Shirvell said that was disingenuous, since it wasn't until closing arguments that a multimillion-dollar award was brought up.

Shirvell said he's unemployed and "there's no way I could possibly ever pay such a judgment."

Gordon said the jury couldn't make him apologize, so the money was the only answer.

"We needed him to retract the flat-out fabrications he had come up with about Chris," she said. "Once he refused to take responsibility, we put it in the hands of the jury."

I'm so sick of people saying whatever they want online, and thinking they'll get away with it. So about time someone is brought to justice.

First Amendment doesnt give you the right to lie, slander, and bash someone.

[Growled]

$4.5M does seem a bit much but if the idiot can't offer a simple apology then let him pay it.

[Skin]

right... cause 4.5 million is fair.

[matt4pack]

Perfect example of why our legal system is a complete joke. Should have been thrown out or at most a $100 reward.

They might as well go ahead and shutdown the entire Internet. It's not like he would ever have the means to pay 4.5M so there's no point to these stupid verdicts anyway.

[Nothing Here]

Just another gay rights injustice. "Give me money cus you hurt my feelings." A load of crap. 4.5 million. What a crock.

[+Blank]

Lo Tec, on 18 August 2012 - 02:35, said:

Just another gay rights injustice. "Give me money cus you hurt my feelings." A load of crap. 4.5 million. What a crock.

What? Obviously you didn't read the story. Even if the guy wasn't gay, you can't spread lies about someone as if its the truth.
I guess this could be a gay issue, i didn't see it that way.

Lesson to be learned here: Don't slander people online, or there will be consequences. People seem to think they're safe to do and say whatever they want online, such as blogs.

[FMH]

The lawyer was completely wrong in his criticism, but $4.5 million is a bit baffling.

[ArialBlue]

Skin, on 18 August 2012 - 02:31, said:

right... cause 4.5 million is fair.

It is for trying to smear someones image and being a redneck.
How would you like to be accused of "enticing minors with alcohol and recruiting people to become homosexual"?

[nekkidtruth]

Growled, on 18 August 2012 - 02:24, said:

$4.5M does seem a bit much but if the idiot can't offer a simple apology then let him pay it.

The amount of money is totally ridiculous, but all he really needed to do was apologize. Incredibly silly of him to choose the alternative in this case.

Skin, on 18 August 2012 - 02:31, said:

right... cause 4.5 million is fair.

Fair or not, it's obvious it did nothing to scare him or teach him a valuable lesson. He still believes what he did was perfectly ok.

Lo Tec, on 18 August 2012 - 02:35, said:

Just another gay rights injustice. "Give me money cus you hurt my feelings." A load of crap. 4.5 million. What a crock.

This has nothing to do with gay rights and everything to do with human rights. Although the amount of money awarded is ridiculous, it doesn't negate the fact that this guy is an ignorant jerk.

[Nothing Here]

And it doesn't negate the fact that the other guy is gay. It may be a human rights issue. I agree. Never slander someone without evidence. But what ****es me off is the 4.5 million. If he was straight, he would never have received that amount.

[nekkidtruth]

Lo Tec, on 18 August 2012 - 02:59, said:

And it doesn't negate the fact that the other guy is gay. It may be a human rights issue. I agree. Never slander someone without evidence. But what ****es me off is the 4.5 million. If he was straight, he would never have received that amount.

The only reason the plaintiff's sexuality is even involved in this case is because the bigoted defendant decided to use the Internet to verbally express his disdain for the plaintiff's sexuality by spreading lies. Your view is very skewed. Most likely due to your own bigotry, seeing as you're more concerned with the plaintiff's sexuality than you are with any other portion of this case.

[KingCracker]

Can I sue if someone criticized me and belittles me on neowin? Or is it a double standard for the so called "oppressed" gays.

[nekkidtruth]

KingCracker, on 18 August 2012 - 03:13, said:

Can I sue if someone criticized me and belittles me on neowin? Or is it a double standard for the so called "oppressed" gays.

Go for it. It's certainly within your right.

[nominak]

KingCracker, on 18 August 2012 - 03:13, said:

Can I sue if someone criticized me and belittles me on neowin? Or is it a double standard for the so called "oppressed" gays.

You could, if someone were doing the same thing the a-hole in this story did. But they're not. And you'd lose.

[Javik]

KingCracker, on 18 August 2012 - 03:13, said:

Can I sue if someone criticized me and belittles me on neowin? Or is it a double standard for the so called "oppressed" gays.

If you're referring to me, you don't honestly think i'd get extradited for criticising your gun habits do you?

In reference to the case... 4.5 mill may seem excessive but accusing a person of being a paedophile can have extremely damaging consequences in pretty much all areas of their lives. It's nothing to do with "gay rights" it's a matter of slander. If people want to act like morons there's nothing stopping them from doing so, but they shouldn't be protected from the consequences of their actions.