twa Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 I hadn't read the complaint.I also don't know if the complaint reflects the facts actually proven at trial. I know your heart is in the right place(even if you are a lib) I don't have a trial transcript, but I do have the ruling on the motion to dismiss if your interested. http://www.matthewsnyder.org/Snyder%20v.%20WBC%20-%20Memorandum%20Opinion%20denying%20S%20&%20R_s%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.PDF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Maybe I've become a bit cynical after perusing a few too many appellate records, since that is part of what I do for a living. I have seen plenty of cases where people make allegations in a complaint that are not backed up by evidence at trial. I have seen plenty of cases where juries have awarded damages where there was no legal basis to do so, solely because the defendant was repulsive and they wanted to punish him any way they could. Most of all, I have seen plenty of very difficult cases, cases where is it not at all clear which way the law should go, where two important legal principles collide. This looks like one of them. I have nothing but the utmost contempt for the Phelps clan and I would take great glee in seeing them go down in flames. Don't get me wrong. But I also value the First Amendment, greatly. I'm going to let this go for now. There will be more factual information coming out soon. Besides, I don't want to defend these ****s any more unless I fell that I have to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Maybe I've become a bit cynical after perusing a few too many appellate records, since that is part of what I do for a living. I have seen plenty of cases where people make allegations in a complaint that are not backed up by evidence at trial. I have seen plenty of cases where juries have awarded damages where there was no legal basis to do so, solely because the defendant was repulsive and they wanted to punish him any way they could. Most of all, I have seen plenty of very difficult cases, cases where is it not at all clear which way the law should go, where two important legal principles collide. This looks like one of them. I have nothing but the utmost contempt for the Phelps clan and I would take great glee in seeing them go down in flames. Don't get me wrong. But I also value the First Amendment, greatly. I'm going to let this go for now. There will be more factual information coming out soon. Besides, I don't want to defend these ****s any more unless I fell that I have to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Just a update $11 million total judgment. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071031/ap_on_re_us/funeral_protests The jury first awarded $2.9 million in compensatory damages. It returned in the afternoon with its decision to award $6 million in punitive damages for invasion of privacy and $2 million for causing emotional distress. Snyder's attorney, Craig Trebil****, had urged jurors to determine an amount "that says don't do this in Maryland again. Do not bring your circus of hate to Maryland again." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Just a update $11 million total judgment. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071031/ap_on_re_us/funeral_protests The jury first awarded $2.9 million in compensatory damages. It returned in the afternoon with its decision to award $6 million in punitive damages for invasion of privacy and $2 million for causing emotional distress. Snyder's attorney, Craig Trebil****, had urged jurors to determine an amount "that says don't do this in Maryland again. Do not bring your circus of hate to Maryland again." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I have nothing but the utmost contempt for the Phelps clan and I would take great glee in seeing them go down in flames. Don't get me wrong. But I also value the First Amendment, greatly. Actually, the resolution I was hoping for was for The Reverand to get decked by some soldier's brother (or maybe a member of his unit, attending the funereal), and for the jury, when Phelps sues the slugger, to issue a ruling of "he needed sluggin". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I have nothing but the utmost contempt for the Phelps clan and I would take great glee in seeing them go down in flames. Don't get me wrong. But I also value the First Amendment, greatly. Actually, the resolution I was hoping for was for The Reverand to get decked by some soldier's brother (or maybe a member of his unit, attending the funereal), and for the jury, when Phelps sues the slugger, to issue a ruling of "he needed sluggin". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 The families are aways very aware of whats going on...to the point that frequently that motorcycle group (whos name is escaping me) shows up to keep a barrier and revs their engines to drown out the protest...their presence is always VERY clear to the funeral goers. Apparently in many of these states they are to be a set distance from the GRAVE SITE with no regard of the procession having to pass them. The Patriot Guard Riders is the name of the motorcycle group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 The families are aways very aware of whats going on...to the point that frequently that motorcycle group (whos name is escaping me) shows up to keep a barrier and revs their engines to drown out the protest...their presence is always VERY clear to the funeral goers. Apparently in many of these states they are to be a set distance from the GRAVE SITE with no regard of the procession having to pass them. The Patriot Guard Riders is the name of the motorcycle group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Tulane, this would hardly be the first jury that nailed a defendant because they hated them, not because they did anything for which they should be legally liable. That's what appeals are for. I'm just saying that there is no way for the jury to have known about anything other than what happened on the day in question. If the jury decided, that based upon that day in question, what they did was extreme, outrageous, and basically despicable conduct, well, that is why we have an action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. That actually is the issue in this case. Like I said, the right to freedom of speech - which believe me, I value as greatly as anyone - is not without limits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Tulane, this would hardly be the first jury that nailed a defendant because they hated them, not because they did anything for which they should be legally liable. That's what appeals are for. I'm just saying that there is no way for the jury to have known about anything other than what happened on the day in question. If the jury decided, that based upon that day in question, what they did was extreme, outrageous, and basically despicable conduct, well, that is why we have an action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. That actually is the issue in this case. Like I said, the right to freedom of speech - which believe me, I value as greatly as anyone - is not without limits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I'm just saying that there is no way for the jury to have known about anything other than what happened on the day in question.If the jury decided, that based upon that day in question, what they did was extreme, outrageous, and basically despicable conduct, well, that is why we have an action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. That actually is the issue in this case. Like I said, the right to freedom of speech - which believe me, I value as greatly as anyone - is not without limits. Wow. That's twice in one day I agree with you. What the heck is happening? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I'm just saying that there is no way for the jury to have known about anything other than what happened on the day in question.If the jury decided, that based upon that day in question, what they did was extreme, outrageous, and basically despicable conduct, well, that is why we have an action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. That actually is the issue in this case. Like I said, the right to freedom of speech - which believe me, I value as greatly as anyone - is not without limits. Wow. That's twice in one day I agree with you. What the heck is happening? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 No, I'm not going to join up.Quit asking. Frtom what i heard you were not only a member but also the president:silly: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 No, I'm not going to join up.Quit asking. Frtom what i heard you were not only a member but also the president:silly: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 This is good news. What those people did to the families of those soldiers was unforgivable. They should be ashamed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 This is good news. What those people did to the families of those soldiers was unforgivable. They should be ashamed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUSkinsFan Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 This is good news. What those people did to the families of those soldiers was unforgivable. They should be ashamed. They would have to be human to be able to feel shame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUSkinsFan Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 This is good news. What those people did to the families of those soldiers was unforgivable. They should be ashamed. They would have to be human to be able to feel shame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Wow. That's twice in one day I agree with you. What the heck is happening? :puke: JK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Wow. That's twice in one day I agree with you. What the heck is happening? :puke: JK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 :applause: :applause: Hopefully this is upheld at appeal and it put's these pieces of **** out of the hate business forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APBT Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Got what they deserve!!! Hell yeah. HooooooRaaaaahhhhh!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artmonkforHOF Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 This is why I cant take anyone who puts together a religious argument seriouslly. If someone tries to prove a point by saying "its what God wants" or "Its what God wants me to do" If God is telling these nutbags to go protest funerals of gay soilders, how can I take what he is telling someone else seriouslly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskinss Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 protesting a funeral is one of the most dispicable things i can think of. if people had protested my fathers funeral i swear i would have kiled the %$#@ers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.