The US legal system seems more bonkers every day

Colonel_Klinck · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:12

FoxEye said:
The legal system shouldn't be driven by emotion, or revenge. That's not what it's supposed to be about.

People who think the law is a tool for getting revenge are dangerous indeed.

This is civil court, not criminal. If someone wrongs you, defames you, libels you then of course its driven by emotion and you want revenge as it might be impossible to fully clear your name of what they said about you. In this case no amount of money is going to convince a 1/4 of the population that these two women weren't in on some conspiracy to steal the 2020 election. Rudy and the others that defamed these women and still do to this day deserve all they get.

CapitalOne · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:15

Is this the kind of thread we are going to get now the Kippers have nothing left to attack that isn’t their fault?

mrk · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:16

ITT, people who don't understand civil court.

jeffk said:
If anyone wants to know how Gulliani lost this case so badly, this is his lawyer:

An attempt was made:

FoxEye · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:17

CapitalOne said:
If you have to ask that, well there is no helping you how on earth are ypu going to understand the justice system?

Yeah, that amazing superpower whose citizens struggle to afford dentistry and basic medicines. Where people die because they try to ration insulin because they can't afford it. Where going to the hospital can bankrupt you for life.

Great stuff. An example to the rest of us.

Colonel_Klinck · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:22

FoxEye said:
How does that warrant $40+ million each? $20 million each for emotional distress, alone..?

Medics and soldiers and cops and firefighters and a host of other people suffer emotional distress on the job. They don't get $20 million payouts.

Many people get trounced on social media and defamed and "cancelled" and all sorts of crap.

How often do people who have similar emotional distress get a $20 million payout from their employer, or from anyone?

Do you not think these two are being unduly compensated in any way, shape or form? Really?

This isn't a work case but if your employer is in fact responsible for your injuries/emotional distress you can be looking at huge pay outs.

This is a case where Rudy and others decided to use these 2 women for their lies. I'd say getting death threats would cause emotional distress.

These women did nothing to deserve being all over Fox News and every other news channel. They were made famous overnight. This isn't like getting cancelled on social media.

How much would you give them? And remember if it isn't an amount that is going to hurt the defendant then they'll just keep doing it.

The punitive damages are just about actual punishment.

CapitalOne · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:23

FoxEye said:
Yeah, that amazing superpower whose citizens struggle to afford dentistry and basic medicines. Where people die because they try to ration insulin because they can't afford it. Where going to the hospital can bankrupt you for life.

Great stuff. An example to the rest of us.

Ok, so are you are saying all those things relate to the civil law process or are you
just saying the US is a bit nuts? If the latter, why the hell would you invoke cases involving total frothers as evidence, rather than more rational people?

NickK · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:25

Richard - London said:
We really do need the right to bare arms in the uk.

First perhaps duty before right.. akin the to swiss mafia. US gun law is corrupted to become a right to shoot people, not the duty to protect the nation.

FoxEye · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:27

CapitalOne said:
Ok, so are you are saying all those things relate to the civil law process or are you
just saying the US is a bit nuts? If the latter, why the hell would you invoke cases involving total frothers as evidence, rather than more rational people?

The latter. How the hell do two public sector workers win $40 million in damages for defamation? It's so utterly beyond ridiculous. That can't be due to loss of earnings, they wouldn't have earned anywhere near that as a public sector worker.

The $20 million emotional distress payment alone... it's beyond imagining.

I don't care that the defendants are "frothers". They could be Hitler for all I care. I just don't understand how the damages scale with the defendant's personal wealth. Or rather, why it should scale.

jigger · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:28

FoxEye said:
How does that warrant $40+ million each? $20 million each for emotional distress, alone..?

Medics and soldiers and cops and firefighters and a host of other people suffer emotional distress on the job. They don't get $20 million payouts.

Many people get trounced on social media and defamed and "cancelled" and all sorts of crap.

How often do people who have similar emotional distress get a $20 million payout from their employer, or from anyone?

Do you not think these two are being unduly compensated in any way, shape or form? Really?

Wealthy Americans should tread carefully when it comes to potentially slanderous liable actions.

Colonel_Klinck · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:28

Richard - London said:
We really do need the right to bare arms in the uk.

Last thing we need in this country is people walking around with their arms exposed!

Hagar · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:28

Richard - London said:
We really do need the right to bare arms in the uk.

Wear a tee shirt.

E: snap

FoxEye · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:31

jigger said:
Wealthy Americans should tread carefully when it comes to potentially slanderous liable actions.

That's not justice tho is it. On the flipside, if you have no money, you can slander whoever you like because nobody is going to bother taking you to court over it if you've got no money?

CapitalOne · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:33

FoxEye said:
The latter. How the hell do two public sector workers win $40 million in damages for defamation? It's so utterly beyond ridiculous. That can't be due to loss of earnings, they wouldn't have earned anywhere near that as a public sector worker.

The $20 million emotional distress payment alone... it's beyond imagining.

I don't care that the defendants are "frothers". They could be Hitler for all I care. I just don't understand how the damages scale with the defendant's personal wealth. Or rather, why it should scale.

Well it’s because they are frothers they got themselves into this situation in the first place

As for scale are you kidding? I’ll take that comment at face value and just say if you don’t understand why financial penalties should be exactly as described in their name so that there is not an ability for the wealthy to afford breaches I’ve got some news for you - speeding fines in the UK can be linked to how much you earn!

jigger · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:35

FoxEye said:
That's not justice tho is it. On the flipside, if you have no money, you can slander whoever you like because nobody is going to bother taking you to court over it if you've got no money?

It is in some cases. I have no sympathy for Alex Jones, he was actively promoting lies, causing misery and profiteering from it.

FoxEye · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:44

CapitalOne said:
Well it’s because they are frothers they got themselves into this situation in the first place

As for scale are you kidding? I’ll take that comment at face value and just say if you don’t understand why financial penalties should be exactly as described in their name so that there is not an ability for the wealthy to afford breaches I’ve got some news for you - speeding fines in the UK can be linked to how much you earn!

Speeding fines are capped at £1000/£2500. Hardly equivalent to a $20 million payment for emotional distress!

Uther · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:46

Don't take this the wrong way but are you drunk? Really living up to your sig tonight. tbh.

Penfold101 · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:53

FoxEye said:
Speeding fines are capped at £1000/£2500. Hardly equivalent to a $20 million payment for emotional distress!

You haven’t actually read up on the case have you? If you had, you’d know what he put these women through for simply doing their job as civil servants, not admitting his wrongdoing or showing any remorse at any point in the case. He has utterly destroyed their lives for, no reason whatsoever.

Guiliani is still holding out in the vain hope Trump will come and rescue him, which is hilarious.

FoxEye · 16 Dec 2023 at 19:58

Penfold101 said:
You haven’t actually read up on the case have you? If you had, you’d know what he put these women through for simply doing their job as civil servants, not admitting his wrongdoing or showing any remorse at any point in the case. He has utterly destroyed their lives for, no reason whatsoever.

Guiliani is still holding out in the vain hope Trump will come and rescue him, which is hilarious.

But if someone else had done it - someone else with less money - the damages would be less. Yes/no?
Conversely, if someone with even more money than Giuliani had defamed them in the same way, even more money in damages? Let's say... Elon Musk?
Where is the point where it gets ridiculous? $100 million for emotional distress?

Werewolf · 16 Dec 2023 at 20:08

FoxEye said:
It's fairly obvious when the same crimes committed by different people result in utterly different damages. In Giuliani's case "defamation causing emotional distress".

Has nobody ever committed defamation against two public sector workers, or do you think every random defamation case results in a $148 million settlement? Lols.

And this is another point. This system encourages people like those two public sector workers to bring cases, but only against those with a lot of money where it would be worthwhile. They could each get $40 million plus (well, if he even had that kind of money).

For defamation and emotional distress. Meanwhile, Harry gets £100k from The Mirror, which is arguably a lot more appropriate.

His actions led to death threats and IIRC the two having to leave their jobs, move away and get police protection, IIRC they're still receiving death threats now.
Given the right wing nutters in the states have done such things as go into a pizza parlour with a gun to "rescue" kidnapped children from a basement that didn't exist it's a credible threat.

And Rudy did it knowing he was spouting nonsense for personal gain.

Penfold101 · 16 Dec 2023 at 20:09

FoxEye said:
But if someone else had done it - someone else with less money - the damages would be less. Yes/no?
Conversely, if someone with even more money than Giuliani had defamed them in the same way, even more money in damages? Let's say... Elon Musk?
Where is the point where it gets ridiculous? $100 million for emotional distress?

The key word is Punitive. Part of it is to punish the one found liable and act as a preventative warning to others. You keep clinging to the ‘emotional distress’ phrase like you haven’t read the details of this particular case, in which Guiliani deserves to be bankrupt.