- cross-posted to:
- news
- cross-posted to:
- news
If behind a paywall you can read it here: https://archive.li/az14v
You must log in or register to comment.
deleted by creator
- witnesses to the incident recall Tomczyk calling the child the “f-slur” and prior usage of similar language
Tomczyk himself admitted in a deposition that he used the word occasionally.
Also worth noting he uses the word unapologetically to refer to his gay brother both “out of joking and out of spite.”
It’s a part of his normal vocabulary.
I’ve got black friends, does that mean…
deleted by creator
Got sued and the judge dismissed it because Tomczyk did call a 13yo a fag.
Also, three more people corroborated that he said the slur. Cory Tomczyk is a piece of shit. Sue me, asshat. That was an opinion, not a fact. Though the fact remains that you’re a petty bitch.
Why it’s a newspaper’s problem if he’s a hateful moron. Imagine calling a child a removed, even personally. It’s so wrong and sad. For a child, for a reporter, and for he is the one to play victim and charge them.
Can’t SLAAP be applied here? This sound like something that should qualify, to me, but not a lawyer and probably pretty ignorant.
SLAPP isn’t a law, it’s a way to describe abuse of the system that’s mostly legal as long as it doesn’t reach the point of frivolity.
Thanks, that’s a useful distinction. But I’m still curious why it wouldn’t apply here? The paper can clearly show that it reported in good-faith, so why isn’t it possible to countersue the politician who clearly is trying to harm them via the courts? I would think this would allow them to pursue financial relief for their legal troubles. I must be missing something fundamental about what SLAAP can and cannot provide.
That’s not how the law works. You need to tell us why an anti-SLAAP action (which Wisconsin does not have as a cause of action) would apply here.
Ok, so Wisconsin not having these rules is a factor. Thanks!