[thepostman]

Good luck with that...

[Purple Haize]

And in the latest twist, Jerry Jr. is threatening to sue Brandon Ambrosino for defamation, per the letter sent by a law firm:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019 ... tdkwphNE9g

Good luck with that

[rogers3]

Good luck with that!

[jinxy]

Actually, i believe there are several things that could happen and several of the claims that can easily be refuted which will could indeed give grounds for defamation to be proven even though some of the other stuff is true.


First - its going to force out into the open all the sources if indeed they do exist. Which is as much of what jr wants as to prove defamation i would expect.

Second - 3 or 4 of those claims are easily refuted and could indeed be grounds for defamation according to a friend of mine who is a seasoned attorney that i deal with regularly. It really doesnt matter that some of it is true. It all has to be true and the grounds that its damaged jr and the schools reputation is going to be easy to prove.

Third - if they can prove malice or that hes i.e grinding an ax (with support that he wasnt even punished while a student though he confessed he was in violation of honor code) then i think this is really where it gets interesting.


Personally i think he got too greedy. He likely had enough evidence and events to get his point across but he kept going for more like the RE deals and the schools structure that are going to look almost exactly like other private schools when you dig into them. That could open him up to defamation. Several of the key elements of the definition are here. Im not saying they win but there is much more a chance than you guys think.

[rogers3]

Refresh me on what can be refuted???

[Purple Haize]

Actually, i believe there are several things that could happen and several of the claims that can easily be refuted which will could indeed give grounds for defamation to be proven even though some of the other stuff is true.


First - its going to force out into the open all the sources if indeed they do exist. Which is as much of what jr wants as to prove defamation i would expect.

Second - 3 or 4 of those claims are easily refuted and could indeed be grounds for defamation according to a friend of mine who is a seasoned attorney that i deal with regularly. It really doesnt matter that some of it is true. It all has to be true and the grounds that its damaged jr and the schools reputation is going to be easy to prove.

Third - if they can prove malice or that hes i.e grinding an ax (with support that he wasnt even punished while a student though he confessed he was in violation of honor code) then i think this is really where it gets interesting.


Personally i think he got too greedy. He likely had enough evidence and events to get his point across but he kept going for more like the RE deals and the schools structure that are going to look almost exactly like other private schools when you dig into them. That could open him up to defamation. Several of the key elements of the definition are here. Im not saying they win but there is much more a chance than you guys think.

The sources won’t have to be out in the open
Having an axe to grind isn’t a crime. And if it was he could counter sue Junior on those grounds
I think Junior has 0 chance. So yeah, a 1% chance would be a 100% greater chance than I think. It’s simply an intimidation technique. Which is the theme of the article. Which makes the case that it is not defemation..

[Yacht Rock]

I'll just add...good luck with that.

[jinxy]

Im just going off what i was told by one of the top 5 or so attorneys in rke that i work with on regular basis. Intimidation, yes but he wants to get out who leaked that as much as anything-and it will have to come out to prove hes not guiIty of defamation (not publically but the attorneys and jr will be privy to it) think several of the claims can be easily refuted and ive mentioned it at least twice. All they have to do is prove one claim to be false and damaging and theres a real chance. The gentleman i spoke to put the chances at 1/3. He said if ambrosino was sloppy at all and lacked in just one area to prove his statements beyond a shadow of a doubt then theres a real chance of winning.

[Jonathan Carone]

Jr - along with most people who have been around a while - already know who most of the quotes are from. They don’t need lawsuits to figure that out.

[Purple Haize]

How do you prove damages?
Reporters have gone to jail to protect their sources
If they only prove one claim then that is the one claim they will have to factor damages into
Again, it’s purely an intimidation tactic....which was the basis for the article. By suing Junior proves the validity of the article

[Yacht Rock]

The burden of proof is actually rather high in a case like this. It's not very simple. If it were, these kinds of cases would be a lot more common.

[chris leedlelee]

Ambrosino was clearly writing this article with malicious intent. The article was littered with half-truths and hearsay. There was some truth in the article, which I believe should be dealt with at LU by giving Jerry Jr less authoritarian management ability. However, the article did go beyond the truth and slightly into sensationalist territory. I'm no expert on defamation lawsuits, however, Breitbart's article shows several claims the article made which are easily refuted. If possible to win a defamation lawsuit, I hope LU throws the kitchen sink at Ambrosino, and makes others wary of smearing LU with half-truths.

[ballcoach15]

I hope that journalist gets put out of business, and the sources revealed, and they get put out of business.

[rhezick]

I hope that journalist gets put out of business, and the sources revealed, and they get put out of business.

Haha, this sounds like something trump would say.

[Jonathan Carone]

The irony of Breitbart exclusively reporting a defamation lawsuit is rich.

[jinxy]

Sure its difficult to prove. What do you think they have been working on the past several weeks?? If you think every portion of the article is true then i dont know what to tell you. If you think none of its true then i dont know what to tell you either.

Damages are what will be difficult to prove as haize said which is why he handicapped it at 33% chance. However i was told twitter replies under jrs tweets and the articles etc could be used in this scenario to prove it causes damage to his/school reputation when the specific untruths can be correllated to the tweets. I would assume that means its an example of swaying public opinion based on untruths. I dont know how that works but i trust this attorneys opinions.

[rogers3]

Sure its difficult to prove. What do you think they have been working on the past several weeks?? If you think every portion of the article is true then i dont know what to tell you. If you think none of its true then i dont know what to tell you either.

Damages are what will be difficult to prove as haize said which is why he handicapped it at 33% chance. However i was told twitter replies under jrs tweets and the articles etc could be used in this scenario to prove it causes damage to his/school reputation when the specific untruths can be correllated to the tweets. I would assume that means its an example of swaying public opinion based on untruths. I dont know how that works but i trust this attorneys opinions.

I'm sure that the last few weeks have been spent doing damage control and probably trying to get at sources. I'm sure your sources are good, but I'm also sure that there are attorney that would say likewise. Things like pictures and the blustering we have seen in response to these stories don't help Jerry's case.

...I hope LU throws the kitchen sink at Ambrosino, and makes others wary of smearing LU with half-truths.

Also, Chris should check some of his statements at the door; the thought that LU could sue supports the idea that LU is not really a non-profit but a money-making venture for Jerry, his family and close confidants. I really wonder if Jerry's responses could end up drawing more scrutiny upon LU and how it is managed; after all, the reports were direct charges against Jerry. Sometimes keeping quiet is the best bet, but now the pot gets stirred again.

[rogers3]

Mistake

[rogers3]

Kasowitz Benson Torres, LLP
"The Meanest Law Firm in NYC"

By the way, I once got a similar, albeit shorter letter from Kalfus and Nachman... so scary!

[rogers3]

Sure its difficult to prove. What do you think they have been working on the past several weeks?? If you think every portion of the article is true then i dont know what to tell you. If you think none of its true then i dont know what to tell you either.

Damages are what will be difficult to prove as haize said which is why he handicapped it at 33% chance. However i was told twitter replies under jrs tweets and the articles etc could be used in this scenario to prove it causes damage to his/school reputation when the specific untruths can be correllated to the tweets. I would assume that means its an example of swaying public opinion based on untruths. I dont know how that works but i trust this attorneys opinions.

I'm sure that the last few weeks have been spent doing damage control and probably trying to get at sources. I'm sure your sources are good, but I'm also sure that there are attorney that would say likewise. Things like pictures and the blustering we have seen in response to these stories don't help Jerry's case.

...I hope LU throws the kitchen sink at Ambrosino, and makes others wary of smearing LU with half-truths.

Also, Chris should check some of his statements at the door; the thought that LU could sue supports the idea that LU is not really a non-profit but a money-making venture for Jerry, his family and close confidants. Ambrosinio's statements seem to be all directed at the leadership of the school and as I read them, I'd say that there is a lot of truth there. I really wonder if Jerry's responses could end up drawing more scrutiny upon LU and how it is managed; after all, the reports were direct charges against Jerry. Sometimes keeping quiet is the best bet, but now the pot gets stirred again.

[flameshaw]

Not an expert/lawyer, but I was under the impression that a public figure (not sure if Jr. qualifies), cannot sue for slander. If you recall, Sr. could not sue Hustler/Larry Flint, magazine for saying some bad things a bout him and his mother, etc.
Like others, I think the best thing for Jr. to do is to ignore the guy. There are too many tangible signs of things being a little wonky.

[chris leedlelee]

@rogers3 I apologize, I was referring specifically to Jerry. As I said, I am no lawyer, but the media as a whole does use half-truths to create a narrative that is quite far from the actual truth. This is what I was referencing. This is coming from someone who acknowledges the poor management structure around Jerry and his lack of accountability. I would hope this spurs the Board of Trustees to deal with it properly. However, I also understand that Ambrosino's article was written with malicious intent and contained many half-truths used to create a narrative that is somewhat far from the actual truth. I have nothing but contempt for self-righteous journalists who create narratives that fit their political objectives. I acknowledge there was some truth in the article that should be handled internally at LU, however, there was also much spin and malicous intent in the article. Both of those things can be true at once.

[Purple Haize]

A half truth still is not defamation. Neither is an article written critically which is what you have here. At least Sr befriended Flynt which sorta took some of the fire away

[rogers3]

@rogers3 I have nothing but contempt for self-righteous journalists who create narratives that fit their political objectives.

I'm sure that you feel equally about people who use positions of power within the ministry to gain personal advantage and are duplicitous in their actions.
I'll take the fake news.

[chris leedlelee]

I'm sure that you feel equally about people who use positions of power within the ministry to gain personal advantage and are duplicitous in their actions.
I'll take the fake news.
[/quote]

If you're referencing Jerry specifically, all of that can be debated within the sphere of LU and his role here. My point is that the article was written maliciously by a badly motivated actor, which doesn't take away some of the truth that was exposed. However, Ambrosino did engage in shady journalism in many aspects of the article. Jerry's authoritarianism = bad. Ambrosino's badly motivated journalism = bad.