Say Hello To New Owner of Herald: Bob Kraft - New England Patriots Forums

***BigMike*** · 04-03-2008, 07:57 PM

Pat Purcell, your ass is about to be sued to oblivion. Kraft, please fire the two inside track "gals"

Matt Walsh has no money, but Tomase's employer, Herald has a few bux left. All Patriots, All the Time, the New herald! LOL

***Tunescribe*** · 04-03-2008, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigMike

Pat Purcell, your ass is about to be sued to oblivion. Kraft, pelase fire the two inside track "gals"

Matt Walsh has no money, but Tomase's employer, Heralrd has a few bux left. All Patriots, All the Time, the New hearld! LOL

They could rename it the Patriot-Herald. That would be pretty cool to have the Pats on the front page every day, especially during baseball season.

***pats1*** · 04-03-2008, 08:14 PM

You're not kidding, either. Be ready for Kraft to take a 12-gauge to the Herald.

cavtroop · 04-03-2008, 08:15 PM

What the heck are you talking about?

***BigMike*** · 04-03-2008, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pats1

You're not kidding, either. Be ready for Kraft to take a 12-gauge to the Herald.

Purcell must have Rupert on line 1 asking for political cover - Krafty is buds with Sandy Weil, Bush 41, etc......look out Herald!

***pats1*** · 04-03-2008, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cavtroop

What the heck are you talking about?

It's becoming more apparent that Walsh ain't got jack. Most are now saying Kraft will sue the Herald into never-never land.

cavtroop · 04-03-2008, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pats1

It's becoming more apparent that Walsh ain't got jack. Most are now saying Kraft will sue the Herald into never-never land.

Ah, gotcha, just finished reading that other thread. This post probably belongs over there

Good for the Pats - I hope they sue the crap out of the Hearald. They won't though, they don't want to alienate the 'media' any more, I'm sure.

At the very least, the Herald should release Tomasse. Zero journalistic integrity.

Wildo7 · 04-03-2008, 09:14 PM

Can I ask what they would sue the herald for? While I deplore Tomase and the like I don't think they libeled anybody, certainly not in a way that could recover damages in court. Writing about "rumors of a taped walkthrough" isn't saying there is a tape out there. It's saying that there are rumors, which was true, even if the rumors were bullshyte, which they were.

If they were going to sue they would have already. If they sue now what is their reason for waiting? Did they want to wait and see if the allegations were true? That doesn't look very good.

I'd be willing to bet anyone here that the Herald will not be sued.

***pats1*** · 04-03-2008, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildo7

Can I ask what they would sue the herald for? While I deplore Tomase and the like I don't think they libeled anybody, certainly not in a way that could recover damages in court. Writing about "rumors of a taped walkthrough" isn't saying there is a tape out there. It's saying that there are rumors, which was true, even if the rumors were bullshyte, which they were.

If they were going to sue they would have already. If they sue now what is their reason for waiting? Did they want to wait and see if the allegations were true? That doesn't look very good.

I'd be willing to bet anyone here that the Herald will not be sued.

The article didn't say "rumors have it," nor did it say that there was any tapes (at least the archived part, I can't remember the rest).

The article specifically said "According to a source, a member of the team’s video department filmed the Rams’ final walkthrough before that 2002 game."

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/f...ome&position=0

Even Kraft called it "a damaging allegation by a newspaper."

Wildo7 · 04-03-2008, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pats1

The article didn't say "rumors have it."

The article specifically said "According to a source, a member of the team’s video department filmed the Rams’ final walkthrough before that 2002 game."

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/f...ome&position=0

Even Kraft called it "a damaging allegation by a newspaper."

But unfortunately, the "according to one source" is a key phrase, as the Herald could claim they were lied to and that wouldn't be libel unfortunately. There's also a fairly large precedent set that allows journalists to protect their sources, so they would never be forced to reveal the source. Not to mention that if they were going to sue them why wouldn't they have already?