Sandman vs Rittenhouse: Which one wins the most lawsuit money?

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Its been posted a couple of times in the past week. Maybe look it up yourself now.

So you're saying it's just too much trouble for you to back up your statement. I mean, YOU just said this.

Got it.

 

[FA_Q2]

Is that really the fucking AG.

Yes, we see the problem in the justice system, fucks like that are in the system and do not even know what justice means.

 

[FA_Q2]

Fox news. My mistake though it was $250 million.

Nicholas Sandmann, the Covington Catholic High School student whose interaction last year with Omaha Tribe elder Nathan Phillips at the Lincoln Memorial went viral, announced Friday that he had reached a settlement in his defamation lawsuit against The Washington Post.

The settlement amount in the $250 million lawsuit was not made public by Sandmann’s attorneys or the Post.

Nicholas Sandmann announces settlement with Washington Post in defamation lawsuit

Nicholas Sandmann, the Covington Catholic High School student whose interaction last year with Omaha Tribe elder Nathan Phillips at the Lincoln Memorial went viral, announced Friday that he had rea…

thehill.com

No, it was not 250 million. That was the suit amount. The settlement amount will be significantly smaller.

It certainly was substantial but I think it is rather silly to think that Sandmann ended up with 'million' though. The numbers in the headlines and in the initial lawsuit are always sensational. The actual amounts are never that high.

 

[BluesLegend]

Rittenhouse should sue Biden for $1.75 trillion.

 

[BluesLegend]

He will not win any, but maybe the family of the one he killed will sue him.

Good luck with that, found not guilty on ALL charges.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Many.

If you have any evidence that he won a substantial sum, I'd love to see it.

Easy to say, since we both know the settlement was confidential. I have reason and logic, however, which is more than you have.

 

[BluesLegend]

Dems are 0 for 2 on attacking kids. Rittenhouse' attorneys are going to rip the left a new one.

 

[Cecilie1200]

No, it was not 250 million. That was the suit amount. The settlement amount will be significantly smaller.

It certainly was substantial but I think it is rather silly to think that Sandmann ended up with 'million' though. The numbers in the headlines and in the initial lawsuit are always sensational. The actual amounts are never that high.

No, but a couple million would be a pittance to CNN and/or WaPo, and vastly preferable to risking a trial. Also, anything less would almost certainly prompt the response, "Fuck you, see you in court."

 

[22lcidw]

Sadly, I've been forced into it due to circumstances this country has never seen.

You're welcome to challenge me to be sure where I stand on those issues if you'd like.

I'll wait here.

Most Progs are frauds. You move away from the Blue areas you were reared to Red areas and then infect them. You move away from neighborhoods when they start changing to a more diverse way. You do not live the way you push others to do. The circumstances are like this because you won't complete the job you spout. I do not mind living in a diverse area. I do mind if threats start. Share your wealth with your neighbors if you stay. But like many people who give up rights for security, you will destroy others as well as yourselves when this is over.

 

[FA_Q2]

No, but a couple million would be a pittance to CNN and/or WaPo, and vastly preferable to risking a trial. Also, anything less would almost certainly prompt the response, "Fuck you, see you in court."

Possibly. I could see them settling for something in the 6 figure range. A few million is certainly not out of the realm of reason either. A 'pittance' or 200 million are not though.

Of course, if they did receive 6 figures, the settlement would still be over a few million, what you see and what you settle for are not the same thing either. Seems the one that always come out the best in these things are the lawyers.

I never did like the idea that settlement sizes are hidden, the companies mostly do this so that they can save face and make it less likely other people sue. The concept benefits the big guys far to much. An intrinsic value to large settlements is that they help keep bad actors from continuing to misbehave. Considering the outright lies they told about Rittenhouse, clearly they are still acting in bad faith.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It's so funny how every time I come across one of your posts, you are stumping for the Democrat! Oh, but you are not one, LOL. Funny stuff.

There is nothing Dem nor Repub in my post.

It's going to be really hard to win a shit where the jury said he shot your kid defending himself,

And a jury said that OJ did not kill anyone, yet he lost civil suits. The two are very different.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

On what basis do the victim's families have to sue him?

He killed/injured their loved ones. Civil suits have a very different level of "proof" needed.

Think of OJ, found not guilty yet lost civil law suits against him for the very thing he was found not guilty of

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Good luck with that, found not guilty on ALL charges.

So was OJ, how did that work out for him in civil courts?

 

[Coyote]

Dems are 0 for 2 on attacking kids. Rittenhouse' attorneys are going to rip the left a new one.

Emma Gonzalez
David Hogg

ya…Repubs

 

[FA_Q2]

There is nothing Dem nor Repub in my post.



And a jury said that OJ did not kill anyone, yet he lost civil suits. The two are very different.

Not exactly the same though. OJ was not determined to have killed anyone in self defense.

You are going to be VERY hard pressed to sue for a wrongful death when the act itself has been determined to not be wrongful. It is possible of course, I just do not see it as very likely at all.

 

[BluesLegend]

So was OJ, how did that work out for him in civil courts?

Go ahead continue attacking this kid see what that gets you. lol Wow the Dems are stuck on dumb.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Not exactly the same though. OJ was not determined to have killed anyone in self defense.

Correct, it was OJ was determined to have not killed anyone, period.

You are going to be VERY hard pressed to sue for a wrongful death when the act itself has been determined to not be wrongful. It is possible of course, I just do not see it as very likely at all.

Harder than suing for wrongful death when the act was determined not to have been committed at all?

 

[FA_Q2]

Emma Gonzalez
David Hogg

ya…Repubs

Are we supposed to know those names or what you were thinking when you put them in? As far as I see, they are gun control activists. I assume there is more to the story...

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Go ahead continue attacking this kid see what that gets you. lol Wow the Dems are stuck on dumb.

I am not attacking anyone, I am saying that him being found not guilty in a criminal trial does not protect him in a civil trial...as the example I gave proves.

 

[FA_Q2]

Correct, it was OJ was determined to have not killed anyone, period.



Harder than suing for wrongful death when the act was determined not to have been committed at all?

Yes. I think it will be. The courts essentially stated that they were attacking Rittenhouse.