Lin Wood to defend 17 yr old kid. ‘Clear self-defense’
Comments
-
Wood got blocked from Twitter. Why would he block some random person like you?FremontTroll said:
No, no, no, no.WestlinnDuck said:Ah, but it did survive the motion to dismiss. After that, it was all down hill for CNN and the Washington Post. They faced millions in discovery costs. They had lots to hide. The Sandmann was facing a fraction of the discovery costs of the defendant. Pretty easy to ask for all relevant email, hard to dig them up. It would take a small mind to ignore the shitload of truly awful internal emails out there and the depositions would also be embarrassing. The trial would be in Kentucky with a jury that would be sympathetic to the plaintiff against a clearly biased and untruthful defendants. I initially guessed that CNN would settle for $5 million. That's a low value against $250 million but a series of settlements add up.
First of all to clarify these companies are insured. The decision is made by the commercial carrier.
Second, discovery and motion work costs at most would run into the low six figures not anywhere near millions. We are talking about one specific story and one specific period of time. This isn’t, for example, an environmental tort against a corporation with years of actions and inaction at question. Any documentary evidence that may exist is very limited in time and scope.
Third, Sandman may have had lower costs but he also had more to lose in discovery. He would have to be deposed. Not fun for a teenager and also likely to sink the case completely especially on the issue of damages.
Fourth, regardless of how you feel about the parties involved the theory behind the case was convoluted. Sandmann would have to prove that WaPo knew that Phillips was lying in republishing his statements. Keep in mind Wood just got destroyed at trial in a case where his client was directly accused of pedophilia on multiple occasions and said accusations were made to tens of millions of people. The Sandmann theory of knowingly republishing false statements would be a lot harder to explain to a jury.
Fifth, again, trial was a long way off so not really a significant threat to force settleKent at that point. A renewed summary judgment motion would be made after discovery was completed.
I agree that the likely costs of discovery for the defendants is a good place to start for the likely value of the settlement.
As a side note I found it interesting when Wood freaked out on Twitter about people unconnected to WaPo speculating that the settlement was probably for nuisance value. Me thinks the lady doth protest too much.
Not sure what Wood is up to now since he blocked me on Twitter after that incident but I am pretty sure he didn’t follow through with his baseless threats to sue for breach of confidentiality. -
I’m not sure if you understand how Twitter works but to clarify Wood received the equivalent of a time-out for violating the terms of service.NorthwestFresh said:
Wood got blocked from Twitter. Why would he block some random person like you?FremontTroll said:
No, no, no, no.WestlinnDuck said:Ah, but it did survive the motion to dismiss. After that, it was all down hill for CNN and the Washington Post. They faced millions in discovery costs. They had lots to hide. The Sandmann was facing a fraction of the discovery costs of the defendant. Pretty easy to ask for all relevant email, hard to dig them up. It would take a small mind to ignore the shitload of truly awful internal emails out there and the depositions would also be embarrassing. The trial would be in Kentucky with a jury that would be sympathetic to the plaintiff against a clearly biased and untruthful defendants. I initially guessed that CNN would settle for $5 million. That's a low value against $250 million but a series of settlements add up.
First of all to clarify these companies are insured. The decision is made by the commercial carrier.
Second, discovery and motion work costs at most would run into the low six figures not anywhere near millions. We are talking about one specific story and one specific period of time. This isn’t, for example, an environmental tort against a corporation with years of actions and inaction at question. Any documentary evidence that may exist is very limited in time and scope.
Third, Sandman may have had lower costs but he also had more to lose in discovery. He would have to be deposed. Not fun for a teenager and also likely to sink the case completely especially on the issue of damages.
Fourth, regardless of how you feel about the parties involved the theory behind the case was convoluted. Sandmann would have to prove that WaPo knew that Phillips was lying in republishing his statements. Keep in mind Wood just got destroyed at trial in a case where his client was directly accused of pedophilia on multiple occasions and said accusations were made to tens of millions of people. The Sandmann theory of knowingly republishing false statements would be a lot harder to explain to a jury.
Fifth, again, trial was a long way off so not really a significant threat to force settleKent at that point. A renewed summary judgment motion would be made after discovery was completed.
I agree that the likely costs of discovery for the defendants is a good place to start for the likely value of the settlement.
As a side note I found it interesting when Wood freaked out on Twitter about people unconnected to WaPo speculating that the settlement was probably for nuisance value. Me thinks the lady doth protest too much.
Not sure what Wood is up to now since he blocked me on Twitter after that incident but I am pretty sure he didn’t follow through with his baseless threats to sue for breach of confidentiality.
Prior to that he spent the months since the Musk verdict blocking anyone who questioned him in anyway.
Not surprising if you read the article I linked above or the excerpt here. The man is unhinged and quite sensitive.
-
Twitter it's a communist platform just line Facebook. They target conservatives.
-
-
Remember when you guys were all over Lin Wood’s nuts?
-
I got five fuck offs and zero upvotes for this 100% correct take.FremontTroll said:Lin Wood is a terrible trial attorney coasting on reputation.
Caveat emptor pal.
Carry on masturbating on the internet over all your perceived grievances but your heroes are just here to grift off of you.
-
You are welcome here to masturbate over your down votes and fuck off grievances anytime friendFremontTroll said:
I got five fuck offs and zero upvotes for this 100% correct take.FremontTroll said:Lin Wood is a terrible trial attorney coasting on reputation.
Caveat emptor pal.
Carry on masturbating on the internet over all your perceived grievances but your heroes are just here to grift off of you. -
Linn got out of the boat. Never get out of the boat.FremontTroll said:Remember when you guys were all over Lin Wood’s nuts?
-
Line Wood is batshit crazy and that’s been apparent for a long while. What should always give Republicans pause is there is a correlation between someone’s love of Trump and their likely questionable mental health. Look at Mike Lindell, has anyone here been following him? Absolutely off his rocker, holy shit. Rudy G? WTF happened to that guy? Sydney Powell? Wow. It’s a Carnival of Crazy.FremontTroll said:Remember when you guys were all over Lin Wood’s nuts?
-
Rubberfist said:
Line Wood is batshit crazy and that’s been apparent for a long while. What should always give Republicans pause is there is a correlation between someone’s love of Trump and their likely questionable mental health. Look at Mike Lindell, has anyone here been following him? Absolutely off his rocker, holy shit. Rudy G? WTF happened to that guy? Sydney Powell? Wow. It’s a Carnival of Crazy.FremontTroll said:Remember when you guys were all over Lin Wood’s nuts?
You don't say...
