Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, November 24, 2021

A jury has awarded more than $25m in damages against white nationalist leaders for violence that erupted during the deadly 2017 far-right rally in Charlottesville.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Damn... and juries had just gotten in good with white nationalists. Now they've messed that up.

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2021-11-23 07:03 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

What the 'Unite the Right' trial reveals about white nationalism in the U.S.

www.youtube.com

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2021-11-23 07:33 PM | Reply

Good luck collecting. -------- like that have hidden their assets.

#3 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-11-24 01:25 PM | Reply

The three comments below were posted by others on NYT message boards. Not my words but I concur

When political organizers, however despicable their ideas, are found liable for arranging a demonstration that turns violent, all political demonstrations are at risk. Protests are quintessential First Amendment conduct and so this verdict jeopardizes all kinds of demonstrations protected by the First Amendment. I trust the case will be reversed. If not, be wary of ever organizing a political demonstration.
=======
The 77 pages of instructions from the judge explained how engaging in a conspiracy did not require all participants to forge an agreement or meet in the same room, or even to know one another. Nor did a conspiracy require the participants to have caused the violence themselves. The main point was that they all shared an objective and could foresee the violence that occurred."
By these standards, there should be hundreds of cases filed against BLM organizers for the violence which occurred at the mostly peaceful protests last year

This verdict will very likely bite back, if held ...
=========

If those who got official permission for a demonstration are held liable/responsible for the actions of counterprotestors and anyone other than themselves, what "responsibility of organisers" will be tried in our courts over demonstrations/protests that were not given official permission and turned into violent riots in the past or the future?

Precedent is a part of our laws and this sets a new precedent to be used in future.

It might behove many to stop and think before cheering over this, in my humble opinion.

Clearly a whole lot of citizens know little about the laws or believe laws should only be applied to some for historical, ideological or emotional reasons, not all. That is not going to happen.

#4 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2021-11-25 07:34 AM | Reply

#4 | POSTED BY MIRANDA7 AT

Not happy the Nazis got burned, are you?

#5 | Posted by Zed at 2021-11-25 08:54 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Good now do BLM and Antifa.

#6 | Posted by visitor_ at 2021-11-25 10:03 AM | Reply

When I was in high school, I had a history teacher who was basically a hippy. He encouraged us to write opinion papers defending the free speech rights even for those whose ideas or speech we found repulsive.

I think it was in large part because he grew up in the era of McCarthyism, and he understood that goes around, comes around.

You accuse anyone who doesn't support your tactics of being a Witch sympathizer. You accuse anyone who doesn't support your tactics of being a Communist sympathizer. You accuse anyone who doesn't support your tactics of being a Nazi sympathizer. And so on.

If there was evidence that the organizers of an event intended to foment violence, then they should pay a price in criminal and/or civil court. But if it's just because "they should have known" there would be violence in response to them because of how many found their speech repulsive, then I agree that is a dangerous precedent, and only complete idiots would make comments like "Not happy the Commies/Nazis/Witches got burned, are you?" in response to someone just for pointing that out.

#7 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-11-25 10:10 AM | Reply

#7 | POSTED BY SENTINEL AT 2021-11-

Sane, democratic America, is engaged in an existential battle with fascism. Like 1941.

It is never (never) in the nature of fascists to leave other people alone. Their next phase is getting a lot of people killed.

#8 | Posted by Zed at 2021-11-25 10:23 AM | Reply

Most of you have no desire what facism is. There is nothing more facist than the government taking action to stop free speech, no matter how offensive that free speech might be, the first amendment is the most important barrier between society and facism.

#9 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2021-11-25 03:02 PM | Reply

Ah so... now firing weapons at people and driving a car into the crowd is "free speech".

Good to know.

#10 | Posted by Corky at 2021-11-25 03:04 PM | Reply

#9. Desire? No, not me.

#11 | Posted by Charliecharles at 2021-11-25 03:12 PM | Reply

The guy who drove the Dodge Chslllenger into the Charlottesville crowd was prosecuted and sued, I'm fine with that. The guy who organized the protest opposing the removal of the Robert E. Lee statues, no he wasn't responsible for what the guy In the Dodge Challenger did, any more than the organizers of BLM were responsible for all the injuries and deaths that occurred at their protests.

#12 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2021-11-25 03:12 PM | Reply

Cirky, you never cease to amaze me how you manage to reduce complex issues into reductive one liners. It must be comforting to be so simple minded.

#13 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2021-11-25 03:15 PM | Reply

Typing on tiny phone screen, sometimes I miss the typos. no Desire was supposed to say no idea. Autocorrect got me, Cirky, I mean Cirky.

#14 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2021-11-25 03:20 PM | Reply

Our courts are not designed to arbitrate right from wrong. Sorry if that doesn't sit well with you. They are designed to differentiate between lawful and unlawful, within the confines of the Constitution. The Constitution is pretty clear on Freedom of Speech.

#15 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2021-11-25 03:42 PM | Reply

The guy who drove the Dodge Chslllenger into the Charlottesville crowd was prosecuted and sued, I'm fine with that. The guy who organized the protest opposing the removal of the Robert E. Lee statues, no he wasn't responsible for what the guy In the Dodge Challenger did, any more than the organizers of BLM were responsible for all the injuries and deaths that occurred at their protests.

"The jury did find the defendants liable under a Virginia state law conspiracy claim and awarded $11 million in damages to the plaintiffs under that claim. Jurors also found five of the main organizers of the rally liable under a claim that alleged they subjected two of the plaintiffs to intimidation, harassment or violence that was motivated by racial, religious or ethnic animosity. The jury awarded the plaintiffs $1.5 million in damages on that claim.

The final two claims were made against James Alex Fields Jr., an avowed Hitler admirer who intentionally drove his car into a crowd of counterprotesters, killing 32-year-old Heather Heyer and injuring 19 others. The jury found Fields, who is serving life in prison for murder and hate crimes, liable on an assault or battery claim and awarded six plaintiffs just under $6.8 million in damages. The jury awarded the same plaintiffs nearly $6.7 million on a claim that Fields intentionally inflicted emotional distress on them."
www.pbs.org

There is no right in the Constitution that does not have some limit on it. You can't harass and intimidate and commit violence and call it "free speech." This is not a new concept. I bet your post history would show plenty of cases of you being upset over post protest hooliganism that became violent but were intentionally and inaccurately lumped together under the banner of "BLM" to cast aspersions on the movement.

#16 | Posted by YAV at 2021-11-25 04:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- It must be comforting to be so simple minded.

What's comforting is having the ability to reduce complex issues into something our rwingers, and perhaps even you, can understand.

#17 | Posted by Corky at 2021-11-25 06:22 PM | Reply

Thanks for the additional information. Im fine with the suits for harassment, intimidation,, any anyone who committed violence as well. They should be held accountable for their specific actions. The broad brush " conspiracy" claims ... .I'd have to see more detail ... .actual evidence of how the conspiracy caused the plaintiffs to be injured before I could support that. I haven't been able to find those details. Maybe the media is obscuringbthoseon purpose to make the story more controversial.

Im also fine with "casting aspersions" on ANY protesters or groups on either side. That's free speech as well, yours and mine. It is when you start putting people in jail or taking all their money by government action fir that free speech that I have an issue. There should be a very high bar for those actions.

#18 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2021-11-26 01:41 AM | Reply

There should be a very high bar for those actions.

There is. Whey reality and your view are in conflict, and you can't find any evidence for your view, reexamine your premise.

#19 | Posted by YAV at 2021-11-26 08:17 AM | Reply

You may wish to read the ACLU's statement on the verdict:
"These defendants had a constitutional right to spread their hateful message, but they had no right to turn the streets of Charlottesville into a battleground that took the life of one person and injured many others."

acluva.org

The ACLU defended Jason Kessler, so consider that as well:
"What we decided to defend, with the facts available at that time, and only after requiring Kessler to swear in court papers that he intended the rally to be "peaceful" and "avoid violence," were important principles of constitutional government. The First Amendment guarantees political speech, including protest, the highest level of protection " and the right to speak out is most robust in public spaces, including public parks and streets. Since this country's founding, people have taken to the parks, streets, and sidewalks to make their voices heard on matters of public concern."

acluva.org

#20 | Posted by YAV at 2021-11-26 08:34 AM | Reply

There should be a very high bar for those actions.
#18 | POSTED BY MIRANDA7

There is. And it was cleared.

#21 | Posted by JOE at 2021-11-26 08:59 AM | Reply

Won't someone think of the poor white supremacists?

Interesting that the only person implicitly siding with them here is an alleged black guy.

#22 | Posted by JOE at 2021-11-26 09:01 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort