• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Yahoo, Tattoos, and tOSU (1-year bowl ban, 82 scholly limit for 3 years)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
jwinslow;1933474; said:
Why is there zero recourse or accountability for the media, and why does it become the accused's responsibility to disprove a potential falsehood?
Click to expand...

There is recourse and accountability. It's called libel law. It's why SI had a legion of lawyers vet that article before it saw print. If pops thinks it's a lie, then I suggest he lawyer up, take it to a court of law, clear your son's name and win a boatload of cash in the process. Otherwise, it's just cheap talk.

It's the same reason why Ohio State is not going on the "offensive" like so many here advocate. They might put a little more weight in SI's lawyers' judgement than they do in the words of a father trying to stick up for his son.
 
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye said:
There is recourse and accountability. It's called libel law. It's why SI had a legion of lawyers vet that article before it saw print. If pops thinks it's a lie, then I suggest he lawyer up, take it to a court of law, clear your son's name and win a boatload of cash in the process. Otherwise, it's just cheap talk.

It's the same reason why Ohio State is not going on the "offensive" like so many here advocate. They might put a little more weight in SI's lawyers' judgement than they do in the words of a father trying to stick up for his son.
Click to expand...
good thing for SI these lawyers finished up on the same day that Tressel stepped down....creating the biggest splash for them.
 
Upvote 0
buckeyesin07;1933469; said:
Finally:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=6621030

Of course, it's buried on the college football page which seems, to say the least, a bit odd, considering how front-and-center the allegations have been on the espn home page.
Click to expand...

In the video at that link, Joe Schad mentions that TP's Nissan, acquired in the last 10 days, was a 2007 with 80,000 miles on it, but says that his mother bought it for around $11,000. You're getting closer to the full story Joe - now if you'd only mention that the trade-in of TP's Dodge, valued at over $7,000, was also part of that deal, you'll actually be portraying the transaction in a fair and complete manner!
 
Upvote 0
BuckeyeNation27;1933479; said:
good thing for SI these lawyers finished up on the same day that Tressel stepped down....creating the biggest splash for them.
Click to expand...

What the hell does that have to do with anything? The article was already written, finished and had been shown to OSU brass.

And, it doesn't address my point. Talk is worthless. If these fathers are so certain of their sons' innocence, take it to a court of law and PROVE IT. There's public vindication and a pot of gold waiting if they're right. Hell, I'm certain they could find a decent libel attorney in Ohio who would take it on a contingency basis for them.
 
Upvote 0
Gatorubet;1933472; said:
"Public Figures". I feel for the kid and his dad, but it is going to be hard to impossible to prove malice.
Click to expand...

I would be suprised if Storm Klein would be considered a "public figure." He's achieved no particular fame or notoriety; he's an amatuer athlete at a public instition on scholarship; and he did not interject himself in this controversy involving the alleged NCAA violations. I don't think he'd have to prove actual malice.

His problem would be damages if he's not suspended.
 
Upvote 0
BB73;1933481; said:
In the video at that link, Joe Schad mentions that TP's Nissan, acquired in the last 10 days, was a 2007 with 80,000 miles on it, but says that his mother bought it for around $11,000. You're getting closer to the full story Joe - now if you'd only mention that the trade-in of TP's Dodge, valued at over $7,000, was also part of that deal, you'll actually be portraying the transaction in a fair and complete manner!
Click to expand...


You know his sources are the dispatch since he has the exact same figures...so why did he omit the part about the trade in?
 
Upvote 0
JohnnyCockfight;1933475; said:
Why do you think Storm will be considered a public figure?
Click to expand...

OH10;1933488; said:
I would be suprised if Storm Klein would be considered a "public figure." He's achieved no particular fame or notoriety; he's an amatuer athlete at a public instition on scholarship; and he did not interject himself in this controversy involving the alleged NCAA violations. I don't think he'd have to prove actual malice.

His problem would be damages if he's not suspended.
Click to expand...

Could be right. I was thinking more along the lines of "involuntary public figure" due to the notoriety of the whole deal.

Either way, SI will go with the "statements made in good faith with reasonable belief that they were true" defense. Look, I just think it next to impossible to sue them (the working press) given the current state of the law. I admit it has been years since I took one of these on either side.
 
Upvote 0
Not so easy.

ORD_Buckeye;1933482; said:
What the hell does that have to do with anything? The article was already written, finished and had been shown to OSU brass.

And, it doesn't address my point. Talk is worthless. If these fathers are so certain of their sons' innocence, take it to a court of law and PROVE IT. There's public vindication and a pot of gold waiting if they're right. Hell, I'm certain they could find a decent libel attorney in Ohio who would take it on a contingency basis for them.
Click to expand...

Libel is a disfavored claim in the US, meaning that very rarely does a person win on such a claim. In the US, we strongly defend freedom of speech.

A person suing on libel has quite a steep climb. The person must prove 1) that the statement was false, 2) that the statement caused harm, and 3) that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement. And that's for the ordinary citizen. Football players or coaches may be deemed to be "public figures." They must prove, in addition to the first three things, 4)that the statement was made with the intent to do harm, or with reckless disregard for the truth. How do you prove that?

And even if you can prove all four of those, to collect (your pot of gold) you have to quantify your damages in dollars. Easier said than done.

Hard to find an attorney that would take such a case on contingency.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Tlangs;1933494; said:
You know his sources are the dispatch since he has the exact same figures...so why did he omit the part about the trade in?
Click to expand...

Because he has a big bowl of pudding where his brain should be?

The next time Joe Schad says something profound (or even correct), it'll be the first.
 
Upvote 0
Gasparin;1933500; said:
Libel is a disfavored claim in the US, meaning that very rarely does a person win on such a claim. In the US, we strongly defend freedom of speech.

A person suing on libel has quite a steep climb. The person must prove 1) that the statement was false, 2) that the statement caused harm, and 3) that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement. And that's for the ordinary citizen. Football players or coaches may be deemed to be "public figures." They must prove, in addition to the first three things, 4)that the statement was made with the intent to do harm, or with reckless disregard for the truth. How do you prove that?

And even if you can prove all four of those, to collect (your pot of gold) you have to quantify your damages in dollars. Easier said than done.

Hard to find an attorney that would take such a case in contingency.
Click to expand...

This. Great first post. By contrast, it is significantly easier to prevail on a libel claim in Great Britain.
 
Upvote 0
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that in the event a player couldn't afford private counsel, that a professor, as mentioned earlier in this thread, or public interest group might have an interest in taking this kind of case up. With regards to damages, I don't see why you couldn't qualify an NFL scout as an expert for valuing character issues when doing draft evaluations. In the era of Goodell and his disciplinary measures, it wouldn't be unreasonable to put on proof that X player would likely be a 2nd round draft choice but for concerns that he doesn't play by the rules, and therefore would likely fall to an undrafted free agent. I'm not saying that's how it would go, but damages wouldn't be the biggest hurdle in such a suit.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top