What's up with the Perrault/Justice v Jim Rose Spat? > Forum > Big Sports 590, KXSP-AM Omaha, Nebraska

Forums

Subject: What's up with the Perrault/Justice v Jim Rose Spat?

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Author

Messages

vranged
Posts:2813

02/04/2008 8:45 AM	Alert
Posted By Omahan on 02/03/2008 3:44 PM And you are a law professor? Because if you are anything short of that...I would suggest you reel your ego in. I understand free speech and defamation as I posted previously. Don't portray Harvard knowledge from a Community College perspective. You understand defamation and free speech IGNORANTLY then. Facts are facts. The First Amendment, as related to Freedom of Speech, has nothing to do with civil torts between private citizens. I guess you enjoy being wrong, because this isn't even a matter of opinion. It's well settled law.

After acknowledging that he was desperate, Dwight said "people will resort to saying things they know aren't true when they are desperate." That about sums it up!

Crit40
Posts:2483

02/04/2008 8:49 AM	Alert
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Counting the Herd one hoof at a time.

vranged
Posts:2813

02/04/2008 8:54 AM	Alert
Posted By Crit40 on 02/04/2008 8:49 AM Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Thank you. It's NO LAWS restricting those things. That's been interpreted by the Courts to mean no government action (legislative, executive or judicial) can prohibit free speech, with some exceptions. It has nothing to do with one radio host calling another radio announcer a liar. Defamation, libel and slander are civil torts.

After acknowledging that he was desperate, Dwight said "people will resort to saying things they know aren't true when they are desperate." That about sums it up!

SeahawksSB42champs
Posts:1206

02/04/2008 9:23 AM	Alert
I may actually listen to the show today, if for no other reason than to listen to Matt's spin on things. It would not surprise me in the least, though, if Trav runs the show solo for 2-3 days while Matt overcomes the hangover and the 48-hour suicide watch he most surely is under right now...

Crit40
Posts:2483

02/04/2008 9:50 AM	Alert
When I originally posted this topic, I was being a little facicious about the legal ramifications. I really just wanted Matt to read it and sweat it out a little bit before he talked to his legal department.

Counting the Herd one hoof at a time.

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Forums > Big Sports 590 > Big Sports 590 > What's up with the Perrault/Justice v Jim Rose Spat?