Live data from Hacker News

Afroman found not liable in defamation case

nypost.com

201–210 of 798 posts

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#201
I would argue that using the footage ought to be legal; they are in his home.

Posting their names is questionable; as officers they are public servants, but naming them is perhaps invasion of privacy?

Lying however would be slander and illegal, in my humble opinion. Not worth 4 million in damages, but at least a cease and desist?

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#202

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oponIfu5L3Y This is the video in question, police again falling trap to the Streisand effect.

Also probably a rare case where there are a few Streisand effect's all packed together, where the cops at each step made it worse for themselves. If they never did the raid in the first place, no music video, no "embarrassment". They could have cut their losses, and not made a big deal about it and probably way less people (including myself) would have ever heard about it. Instead they decided to sue, which made even…

Tin foil hat version is that they’re looking for a payday where they can and if this didn’t work they can always check whether the police department failed them as an employer.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> falsely claimed that the cops “stole my money” That appears to have happened; they're claiming it was a miscount. > were “criminals disguised as law enforcement,” Seems fair. (And opinion, which can't be defamation.) > They also falsely stated that the officers are “white supremacists,” Statistically that's a pretty sensible assumption. I'd note that the jury found Afroman not liable on all these.

[flagged]

> I claim that Afroman is a criminal.

At 1:44 his own video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oponIfu5L3Y) says "well, I know why narcotics" regarding the warrant. So I think he'd be OK with that statement of opinion.

If that was defamation, warrants like the one in this case are defamatory, having asserted he kidnapped someone.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#204
post #64

I know things are bad in the USA right now, but news like these show that you still have your basic rights. This kind of song would not fly in any other country on Earth. No other country has Freedom of Speech laws strong enough to defend against insulting the police. There have been some people abusing their freedom in recent times cough Kanye cough , but for every loud nazi there are ten more excellent people whose…

> This kind of song would not fly in any other country on Earth. No other country has Freedom of Speech laws strong enough to defend against insulting the police.

What? You have no idea what you are talking about.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#205
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

American police are trained to be afraid. They escalate situations constantly. They're trained that every traffic stop is LIKELY their last. I've had a gun pulled on me twice for traffic stops when I went to grab something. I'm white.

[flagged]

The Snopes article is useful. For those who don’t want to read it, here is what Grossman says about that quotation:

> That clip took my entire, full day presentation, and took it completely out of context.

-They left out the part where I say that this is a normal biological, hormonal backlash from fight-or-flight (sympathetic nervous system arousal) to feed-and-breed (parasympathetic nervous system arousal) that can happen to anyone in a traumatic event.

-They left out the part where I say that there is nothing wrong if it doesn’t happen, and absolutely nothing wrong if it does happen.

-They left out the part where I say it happens to fire, EMS and even victims of violent crime.

-They left out where I say that it scares the hell out of people.

-They left out where I talk about it (and remember it is common in survivors of violent crime), as kind of a beautiful affirmation of life in the face of death; a grasping for closeness and intimate reassurance in the face of tragedy.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a country with a lot of guns. Police do regularly get shot at when raiding. Call me naive, but I think this could be solved by stricter gun laws. Yes, bad guys might have guns, but that's the case everywhere around the world. But being afraid that everybody could have a gun and use it against you while doing your work must clearly change something in your behaviour as a police officer... Why not calm down the…

> Yes, bad guys might have guns, but that's the case everywhere around the world. The number of guns in the hands of bad guys caries drastically around the world. You can’t reduce this to “it’s the same everywhere” because it’s not.

True!

What I meant is that I think German police, for example, are probably less worried that a traffic stop is likely to get them killed or have them escalate a situation to the use of lethal force.

I think this might be different in the US because guns are just much more common there.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a country with a lot of guns. Police do regularly get shot at when raiding. And police departments get sent videos of every officer death from around the country and regularly watch them for "training purposes". So it makes sense that they are in a constant state of paranoia.

> It's a country with a lot of guns. Police do regularly get shot at when raiding. Call me naive, but I think this could be solved by stricter gun laws. Yes, bad guys might have guns, but that's the case everywhere around the world. But being afraid that everybody could have a gun and use it against you while doing your work must clearly change something in your behaviour as a police officer... Why not calm down the…

You are naive for assuming that the government aren't the bad guys with guns. Just ask the 30,000 Iranian protesters that were slaughtered if you don't believe me.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#208
post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> falsely claimed that the cops “stole my money” That appears to have happened; they're claiming it was a miscount. > were “criminals disguised as law enforcement,” Seems fair. (And opinion, which can't be defamation.) > They also falsely stated that the officers are “white supremacists,” Statistically that's a pretty sensible assumption. I'd note that the jury found Afroman not liable on all these.

> They also falsely stated that the officers are “white supremacists,” > Statistically that's a pretty sensible assumption. Interesting, is there a source or some data you’re aware of that suggests that it’s a statistically safe assumption?

We can't on one side ask for people to not make judgment based on statistics and on the other side saying that making a shortcut based statistics is valid.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> falsely claimed that the cops “stole my money” That appears to have happened; they're claiming it was a miscount. > were “criminals disguised as law enforcement,” Seems fair. (And opinion, which can't be defamation.) > They also falsely stated that the officers are “white supremacists,” Statistically that's a pretty sensible assumption. I'd note that the jury found Afroman not liable on all these.

[flagged]

The bar for defamation is much higher for public officials like police than it is for private citizens.

Also, while that is a very stupid and racist statement, I don't believe it is defamatory. If you falsely claimed specific crimes, then it might be.

Post reply on HN