http://twitter.com/aydenhector2/status/1250576764926963712?s=21 It's not often that a recently booted student athlete goes full lawyer and PR mode. Buckle up baby.
http://twitter.com/aydenhector2/status/1250576764926963712?s=21
https://twitter.com/cfbquotes/status/1250280245992677376 Right or wrong, CFB should prepare his anus and his wallet. Defending a defamation suit is no joke. Naming names -- minors' names -- under investigation, but not charged, is playing with fire. Plaintiff's attorneys have ways of discovering alt identities. Buckle up. Either way, it will be interesting. (not saying the kids will win. Don't twist.) Proving a defamation suit is an incredibly high bar legally, I think that’s one of the most common misconceptions people have about the law. I’m not a lawyer, but to me this seems to be nowhere near reaching the standard of defamation. And if you sue and lose, which is the most likely thing in a defamation case by a mile, you often have to pay the attorneys fees (although I’m not sure this is true for Washington and I’m too lazy to look it up). Defamation suits are one of the biggest wastes of time. You have to prove negligence, harm, and that the statement was maliciously false. Also, anytime you file suit on someone it should be because they have assets or insurance worth your time. Suing an 18 year old running a parody twitter account is a waste of time unless you like burning money for no reason. Thought the malice part only applies to public figures? Unless you can make the argument prominent high school athletes are public figures (hmm). Moot point though because there is no clear disregard for the truth in publishing/referencing a police report, right? In fact, the opposite. Studying for the Bar (or should be), but instead am relying on a teen boi recruiting site for legal tidbits. I know I’ll pass..
https://twitter.com/cfbquotes/status/1250280245992677376 Right or wrong, CFB should prepare his anus and his wallet. Defending a defamation suit is no joke. Naming names -- minors' names -- under investigation, but not charged, is playing with fire. Plaintiff's attorneys have ways of discovering alt identities. Buckle up. Either way, it will be interesting. (not saying the kids will win. Don't twist.) Proving a defamation suit is an incredibly high bar legally, I think that’s one of the most common misconceptions people have about the law. I’m not a lawyer, but to me this seems to be nowhere near reaching the standard of defamation. And if you sue and lose, which is the most likely thing in a defamation case by a mile, you often have to pay the attorneys fees (although I’m not sure this is true for Washington and I’m too lazy to look it up). Defamation suits are one of the biggest wastes of time. You have to prove negligence, harm, and that the statement was maliciously false. Also, anytime you file suit on someone it should be because they have assets or insurance worth your time. Suing an 18 year old running a parody twitter account is a waste of time unless you like burning money for no reason.
https://twitter.com/cfbquotes/status/1250280245992677376 Right or wrong, CFB should prepare his anus and his wallet. Defending a defamation suit is no joke. Naming names -- minors' names -- under investigation, but not charged, is playing with fire. Plaintiff's attorneys have ways of discovering alt identities. Buckle up. Either way, it will be interesting. (not saying the kids will win. Don't twist.) Proving a defamation suit is an incredibly high bar legally, I think that’s one of the most common misconceptions people have about the law. I’m not a lawyer, but to me this seems to be nowhere near reaching the standard of defamation. And if you sue and lose, which is the most likely thing in a defamation case by a mile, you often have to pay the attorneys fees (although I’m not sure this is true for Washington and I’m too lazy to look it up).
https://twitter.com/cfbquotes/status/1250280245992677376 Right or wrong, CFB should prepare his anus and his wallet. Defending a defamation suit is no joke. Naming names -- minors' names -- under investigation, but not charged, is playing with fire. Plaintiff's attorneys have ways of discovering alt identities. Buckle up. Either way, it will be interesting. (not saying the kids will win. Don't twist.)
https://twitter.com/cfbquotes/status/1250280245992677376
https://twitter.com/geescottjr/status/1250630127727210498
So, obviously we're not posting it here, but are the names of the other 4 or 5 100% confirmed to be known or are we just speculating? They are known. Not speculation.
So, obviously we're not posting it here, but are the names of the other 4 or 5 100% confirmed to be known or are we just speculating?
i never root for the kids to commit sex crimes
https://twitter.com/geescottjr/status/1250630127727210498 Why did King5 make an editor's note clarifying that one random kid wasnt involved. That seems...odd
https://twitter.com/geescottjr/status/1250630127727210498 Why did King5 make an editor's note clarifying that one random kid wasnt involved. That seems...odd It would appear he got in touch with his lawyers
https://twitter.com/geescottjr/status/1250630127727210498 Why did King5 make an editor's note clarifying that one random kid wasnt involved. That seems...odd It would appear he got in touch with his lawyers But there was no mention of him in any actual news reports. I don't think any names were mentioned. It seems odd that you would clarify that a certain student you never explicitly mentioned was not involved in an incident. The only explanation I see is that this is driven by pure narcissism like, "my son is a local celebrity. You need to run an extra story to make sure everyone knows he wasnt involved."
General rule ... if somebody works really hard to convince you of something ... probably means that they are in full damage control mode
King 5 is burying them right now on TV. This is only getting started.
Tail end of story said why KING5 sat on the story I also say it’s super fishy that those videos can’t be re-discovered ... computer forensics can be pretty damning and this should be a layup
https://twitter.com/geescottjr/status/1250630127727210498 Why did King5 make an editor's note clarifying that one random kid wasnt involved. That seems...odd Yep just said the same thing in the Wam.Something really weird about exonerating one and only one individual.And the wording is funny too. The police reports explicitly state Scott wasn’t involved? That seems extremely unlikely.
https://twitter.com/geescottjr/status/1250630127727210498 Why did King5 make an editor's note clarifying that one random kid wasnt involved. That seems...odd Yep just said the same thing in the Wam.Something really weird about exonerating one and only one individual.And the wording is funny too. The police reports explicitly state Scott wasn’t involved? That seems extremely unlikely. It doesn't seem odd to me. King 5 had access to all the police reports, and given that it's been widely assumed that Gee was one of the "three football players who received scholarships from prestigious universities", the disclaimer seems pretty necessary. As big of a boob Gee Sr. is, he should absolutely try to clear his son's name. Now the question is who is that third player? Hopefully not our guy.
