Dog being sued for slander

vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Duane 'Dog' Chapman Faces Lawsuit From Son's Insulted Girlfriend - Tittle-Tattle Too™: The Post Chronicle

Yes indeed. So now I've changed my opinion on this for a second time. I could care less about Dog, but this gal is nothing more than a hustler who set him up for the money the whole time.

#1, he didn't call her a name at all. It might be argued that he referred to her by a racial slur, but in the context of the conversation, that's going to be tough to argue.

IMO, he should countersue HER for slander for calling him a racist. If he can get sued for saying ######, why can't she be sued for saying racist? He has a better case than she does because he can actually prove damages (lost his job). What exactly has she lost by all of this?
 
spike2763

spike2763

New Member
vraiblonde said:
Duane 'Dog' Chapman Faces Lawsuit From Son's Insulted Girlfriend - Tittle-Tattle Too™: The Post Chronicle

Yes indeed. So now I've changed my opinion on this for a second time. I could care less about Dog, but this gal is nothing more than a hustler who set him up for the money the whole time.

#1, he didn't call her a name at all. It might be argued that he referred to her by a racial slur, but in the context of the conversation, that's going to be tough to argue.

IMO, he should countersue HER for slander for calling him a racist. If he can get sued for saying ######, why can't she be sued for saying racist? He has a better case than she does because he can actually prove damages (lost his job). What exactly has she lost by all of this?
Click to expand...
[/SIZE][/I]

I agree. he didn't know he was being taped. He never met her, how could she sue?
 
Pete

Pete

Repete
This is a blind shot for scoring cash and it might just work if it is not dismissed outright by the judge. I am sure in the sea of retards they can find 12 to put on the jury who will see that the bad rich man said a bad word and it somehow equates to millions in damages.
 
This_person

This_person

Well-Known Member
Pete said:
This is a blind shot for scoring cash and it might just work if it is not dismissed outright by the judge. I am sure in the sea of retards they can find 12 to put on the jury who will see that the bad rich man said a bad word and it somehow equates to millions in damages.
Click to expand...
He's spent days apologizing for saying something bad. Now, he'll probably have to settle for some "undisclosed" large amount of money just to not fight against what he's spent days apologizing for. He won't want to be seen as the white guy arguing he wasn't being racist after spending all of this time apologizing for speaking in a racist fashion.
 
Pete

Pete

Repete
This_person said:
He's spent days apologizing for saying something bad. Now, he'll probably have to settle for some "undisclosed" large amount of money just to not fight against what he's spent days apologizing for. He won't want to be seen as the white guy arguing he wasn't being racist after spending all of this time apologizing for speaking in a racist fashion.
Click to expand...

This is assuming he has any "real money". He doesn't seem like the "tuck it away for a rainy day" type.
 
kom526

kom526

They call me ... Sarcasmo
I'm thinking he spends all his money on hair gel and boobs for his wife.
 
ImnoMensa

ImnoMensa

New Member
It would seem to me that Dog got it right. He had good reason for wanting to avoid his son getting tied to this woman. He had her pegged from scratch.
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Could this case...

vraiblonde said:
#1, he didn't call her a name at all. It might be argued that he referred to her by a racial slur, but in the context of the conversation, that's going to be tough to argue.

IMO, he should countersue HER for slander for calling him a racist. If he can get sued for saying ######, why can't she be sued for saying racist? He has a better case than she does because he can actually prove damages (lost his job). What exactly has she lost by all of this?
Click to expand...

...be the first step towards the last steps of the march towards racial equality in our country?

We have played a tortured game with free speech in this country about some things you can't say when it is a racial issue amidst endless cultural tussles that you can say pretty much anything else under the long, warm blanket of the first amendment. When speech is free except this or that exception, it is no longer free. It is limited and then the debate is over the exceptions.

There never was a restriction on falsely crying 'fire!'. There are a few on where when when you say it. On a cell phone to your child is not one of them.

Vrail makes a great point; Dog is now the victim. He is the one suffering. And the only argument the government will have in supporting her claim of injury will cross into whether or not internal family dynamics are private or public.

This might get real darn interesting!
 
Pete

Pete

Repete
vraiblonde said:
Well, he obviously isn't spending his money on wardrobe or grooming, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

Britney Spears spends $16K a month on clothes. From what I have seen they must be damn expensive clothes because she doesn't wear much, most notably panties.
 
crabcake

crabcake

But wait, there's more...
Good point made last night (I think it was Fox H&C but not sure cause I was crashing) ... HE (dog) didn't publish the taped conversation. His son (I believe) did; therefore, she should be suing the son; not Dog. :shrug:
 
FromTexas

FromTexas

This Space for Rent
crabcake said:
Good point made last night (I think it was Fox H&C but not sure cause I was crashing) ... HE (dog) didn't publish the taped conversation. His son (I believe) did; therefore, she should be suing the son; not Dog. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Slander doesn't have to be on the air. Slander can be me whispering to Pete what a whore Vince is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top