Regarding the BBC, the article highlights a defamation lawsuit filed by Trump in Miami, alleging the broadcaster maliciously spliced his comments to falsely portray him encouraging violence. Despite an apology from the BBC, the lawsuit proceeds, sparking controversy and prompting calls for action from British political figures. Internal concerns about the editing were raised, leading to the resignations of key BBC officials. Notably, the BBC’s funding comes from a mandatory license fee in the UK, adding another layer of complexity to the situation.
Read More
Donald Trump has filed a $10 billion lawsuit against the BBC, alleging defamation and violations of Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act due to the editing of his speech before the January 6th Capitol attack. The BBC responded with a statement asserting it would defend itself against the lawsuit. The UK government and political figures have expressed support for the BBC, with some calling on them to stand firm against Trump’s legal claims. Despite previously acknowledging the editing as an “error of judgment” and issuing an apology, the BBC maintains there is no legal basis for Trump’s claims, while the episode never aired in the US.
Read More
President Donald Trump filed a $10 billion lawsuit against the BBC, accusing the broadcaster of defamation and unfair trade practices. The 33-page suit alleges the BBC intentionally misrepresented Trump’s January 6, 2021 speech by splicing together different parts of it. The lawsuit, filed in a Florida court, seeks $5 billion in damages for defamation and another $5 billion for unfair trade practices, following the BBC’s apology last month for an editing error. The BBC has not yet issued a response to the lawsuit.
Read More
A federal appeals court panel upheld the dismissal of Donald Trump’s $475 million defamation lawsuit against CNN. The court found Trump’s claims regarding CNN’s use of “the Big Lie” to be “unpersuasive” and determined that the term did not constitute a false statement of fact. The judges, including those nominated by Trump, stated that the term was susceptible to multiple interpretations and that CNN’s use of it, therefore, did not support a defamation claim. This decision is the latest in a series of failed lawsuits by Trump against media outlets reporting on his claims.
Read More
The BBC has declared it will defend itself against President Trump’s threatened lawsuit, dismissing his claims of reputational damage and potential damages up to $5 billion. The broadcaster’s legal response centers on the argument that the Panorama program, “Trump: A Second Chance?,” did not air in the United States due to licensing restrictions, thus preventing any harm to his reputation within the US. Furthermore, the BBC implemented geo-blocking on its iPlayer platform, ensuring the program was inaccessible to American viewers.
Read More
President Donald Trump is seeking to overturn the jury’s verdict in a civil lawsuit where he was found liable for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll and later defaming her. His legal team argues that the $5 million verdict was based on “indefensible evidentiary rulings,” allowing “inflammatory propensity evidence.” Trump’s lawyers claim the trial judge warped federal evidence rules to support Carroll’s claims, which they call a “politically motivated hoax.” The appeal to the Supreme Court follows a denial by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, who upheld the original verdict.
Read More
The case involved a California prison psychologist who received a threat from an inmate and subsequently lost her job after raising safety concerns. A jury awarded Dr. Beth Fischgrund $16.8 million due to the employer’s alleged failure to protect her, firing her, and defaming her by spreading rumors. The inmate, who reportedly threatened the psychologist, was not removed from the unit, and Fischgrund was subsequently let go and faced reputational damage. The court determined the state failed to address the risk properly, resulting in severe emotional damage to the psychologist.
Read More
The Supreme Court has declined to hear Alex Jones’ appeal of the $1.4 billion judgment against him, stemming from his false claims that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was a hoax. Jones, who was found liable for defaming and inflicting emotional distress upon the victims’ families, argued that he should have been granted a trial before a judge issued a default judgment against him. The court’s rejection means the massive judgment, awarded by a Connecticut jury in 2022, will stand, alongside a nearly $50 million judgment from a Texas court.
Read More
The Supreme Court has upheld the $1.4 billion judgment against Alex Jones for his false claims that the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was a hoax. Jones had appealed, arguing a trial should have been held to assess the allegations by the victims’ families; however, the justices did not comment on their order. Jones filed for bankruptcy and is also appealing a separate $49 million judgment in Texas. Currently, the liquidation of Infowars’ assets is underway, with efforts to sell off assets moving to a Texas state court.
Read More
A federal judge dismissed Drake’s defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group regarding Kendrick Lamar’s diss track “Not Like Us,” ruling the lyrics were opinion within the context of a rap battle. Judge Jeannette A. Vargas stated that the song’s accusations, though serious, would not be perceived as factual by a reasonable listener due to the heated and hyperbolic nature of the feud. The lawsuit, filed in January, alleged the track, which explicitly branded Drake as a pedophile, contained false and defamatory allegations, but the court sided with UMG, leading Drake’s legal team to announce plans to appeal the decision. The song, recognized for its success, was the culmination of a rap battle that included escalating personal insults.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker