Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Ty Carpenter

Wisconsin man ordered to pay $450K to Sandy Hook father for saying son's death was a hoax

Recommended Posts

It was a defamation lawsuit Micah.

Fetzer said something pretty ugly about the father that he could not demonstrate to be accurate.

Namely that the father was cooperating in a murder hoax about his son.

I warned about this when I wrote my long article about Fetzer a long time ago. He is the kind of guy who the MSM can use that smear rubric Conspiracy Theorist about, and be justified in doing so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

It was a defamation lawsuit Micah.

Fetzer said something pretty ugly about the father that he could not demonstrate to be accurate.

Namely that the father was cooperating in a murder hoax about his son.

I warned about this when I wrote my long article about Fetzer a long time ago. He is the kind of guy who the MSM can use that smear rubric Conspiracy Theorist about, and be justified in doing so. 

A. Freedom is more important than feelings.

B. "Inciting harassment" is a BS charge, there is no way free speech can exist while that is a serious charge. Fetzer never tried to repeatedly contact anybody after being asked not to, so there was no harassment and he is only a scapegoat. Especially here where the father CONSENTED to becoming a public figure/celebrity by granting media interviews.

C. Because the father has chose to use his feelings as a weapon against freedom of speech, I believe he is an evil danger to society, and I frankly don't have any sympathy for him.

Edited by Micah Mileto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

Am I the only one who think "inciting harassment" is a BS legal charge?

Micah it is a civil case not criminal so there are no charges.  Under the tort of defamation, this case does not infringe on free speech anymore then someone copying anothers work and facing a suit for copyright violation.  There are limits to speech.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

Micah it is a civil case not criminal so there are no charges.  Under the tort of defamation, this case does not infringe on free speech anymore then someone copying anothers work and facing a suit for copyright violation.  There are limits to speech.   

I'll be thinking for myself today, thank you very much. And I'm not once to argue about semantics on the internet - the bottom line is, somebody was legally dealt a punishment for their speech over no good reason at all. IMO free speech laws should be stronger.

Edited by Micah Mileto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

I'll be thinking for myself today, thank you very much. And I'm not once to argue about semantics on the internet - the bottom line is, somebody was legally dealt a punishment for their speech over no good reason at all. IMO free speech laws should be stronger.

Never claimed you were not thinking for yourself.  You asked a question.  I answered.  I also corrected you since it appears you did not know the difference between a civil case and a criminal case.  I was trying to help you understand this case accurately; it was not semantics as you said.  I see Jim also tried to explain this to you so you don't  need to be defensive.  

 Let me add,  understand the right to free speech applies to the government.  People are not allowed to say whatever they want about others.  Hence, defamation.  What you appear to suggest is people can lie or make untrue statements generally about others and it should be protected.  You can feel that way but luckily that is not the law.  So to again answer YOUR question, I don't think this type of tort is  a "bs charge". If the judgment went this way there had to be a legal merit to the claim.  It might be overturned.   

Edited by Cory Santos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I don't think Fetzer had a lawyer.

 

 

Jim I think you are right.  I recall reading he answered the Complaint himself and I recall looking it up and reading it thinking he really needed to hire an attorney.

Edited by Cory Santos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the Nov. 22, 2013, Dallas commemorations, when the city

kept dissidents out of Dealey Plaza so Bonesman David McCullough

could give a speech, and thousands of us were

protesting on surrounding streets, Alex Jones was ranting on a streetcorner to

draw TV cameras and distract attention from the legitimate critics of the official

version of the JFK/Tippit murder case. That is how the system is played.

Edited by Joseph McBride

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe is describing  the most frustrating and futile day of my whole long career in the field.

To see Alex Jones, of all people, screaming into his bull horn at the Dallas Police who were blocking all entry ways into the Plaza as the media cameras trained on this PT Barnum of the JFK case, while people like me and Joe tried to decide what to do with ourselves, that made you realize just how effed up everything was with this case.

And the whole opportunity that Fetzer and Jones present to the MSM, to group their ideas on things like Sandy Hook--with their crisis actors and faked deaths-- to ours on JFK, well, it almost makes one understand what Lance Payette was all about.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/17/2019 at 12:44 AM, Joseph McBride said:

At the Nov. 22, 2013, Dallas commemorations, when the city

kept dissidents out of Dealey Plaza so Bonesman David McCullough

could give a speech, and thousands of us were

protesting on surrounding streets, Alex Jones was ranting on a streetcorner to

draw TV cameras and distract attention from the legitimate critics of the official

version of the JFK/Tippit murder case. That is how the system is played.

As Jim Di mentions on another thread, so well said.  How many of the commenters like jones, regarding the thread topic, have lost a child suddenly to violence?  It's a terrible thing, no matter the form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...