|
Post by bulkey on Oct 12, 2021 12:09:55 GMT -5
Taking a lunch break, I noted that the Houston Astros were accused of stealing signs (which they actually did do a couple of years ago), and manager Rusty Baker defended his team. Clearly, the accuser was mouthing off without real evidence (doesn't mean it did or didn't happen): www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/32381831/houston-astros-manager-dusty-baker-says-sign-stealing-allegations-chicago-white-sox-heavy-accusationsThe biggest hurt to UConn fans was Pat Summitt's unfounded accusations against Geno. But I actually found more "libelous" McGraw's accusations at the presser in the 2018 (?) final four where she quite explicitly accused Geno of being abusive to his players. The timing was perfect: essentially hashtagging during the FF and sending a message to potential recruits. I don't think libel laws specifically should be applied. But I do think the accusing party, if they can't prove their case, needs to suffer something. In ancient Athens, the accuser, when he failed to convict the defendant, might have to go into exile (see Demosthenes v. Aeschines). That might be enough of a punishment.
|
|
|
Post by rockymtblue2 on Oct 12, 2021 13:39:07 GMT -5
In all but the most unusual cases (statutory immunity and the like) the libel laws do apply, but many of the sports' targets of accusations would be deemed public figures and would bear the high burden of proven actual malice by the one who uttered the libel. I do like better the notion of exile. We could have gotten rid of Muffet much sooner.
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on Oct 12, 2021 13:40:27 GMT -5
In all but the most unusual cases (statutory immunity and the like) the libel laws do apply, but many of the sports' targets of accusations would be deemed public figures and would bear the high burden of proven actual malice by the one who uttered the libel. I do like better the notion of exile. We could have gotten rid of Muffet much sooner. Darn! You're right of course: public figures and all that.
|
|