Any lawyers here? Seriously.

[castlelong1]

I'll sign on as a defendant in a class action suit.

Many of the posters here have spent hours educating (or trying to) regular people who think they are informed. ESPN knowingly, carelessly, and recklessly presented things as news that were not. When not knowingly it was at least negligent when people on their own "Network" can be cited as sources to the contrary of what they present as news.

I've seen plenty of examples of one "reporter" saying something as another "reporter" has something contradictory. If both reporters work for ESPN is that the definition of "knowingly."

No, it is not overly broad. CBS news and Fox News are separate and distinct from their entertainment shows. I've never seen someone from Fox News on Married with Children or Bill O'Reilly doing a voice on the Simpsons. Similarly I never saw Walkter Kronkite on Star Trek or Katie Couric and Mike Wallace on Two and Half Men.

PtI is on Sportscenter. I've seen Marc Schlereth on Sportcenter then go on Mike and Mike. Everything from Cold Pizza to ATH is presented as news. The target is wide but contained to ESPN.

 

[Wildo7]

PatsFaninAZ is an attorney I believe.

 

[NEBG]

I'll sign on as a defendant in a class action suit.

Many of the posters here have spent hours educating (or trying to) regular people who think they are informed. ESPN knowingly, carelessly, and recklessly presented things as news that were not. When not knowingly it was at least negligent when people on their own "Network" can be cited as sources to the contrary of what they present as news.

I've seen plenty of examples of one "reporter" saying something as another "reporter" has something contradictory. If both reporters work for ESPN is that the definition of "knowingly."

No, it is not overly broad. CBS news and Fox News are separate and distinct from their entertainment shows. I've never seen someone from Fox News on Married with Children or Bill O'Reilly doing a voice on the Simpsons. Similarly I never saw Walkter Kronkite on Star Trek or Katie Couric and Mike Wallace on Two and Half Men.

PtI is on Sportscenter. I've seen Marc Schlereth on Sportcenter then go on Mike and Mike. Everything from Cold Pizza to ATH is presented as news. The target is wide but contained to ESPN.

What exactly would your class action suit be for? How were you harmed? Please, be serious.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

I'll sign on as a defendant in a class action suit.

I think you want to be the plaintiff not the defendant. :bricks:

 

[shmessy]

I'll sign on as a defendant in a class action suit.

Many of the posters here have spent hours educating (or trying to) regular people who think they are informed. ESPN knowingly, carelessly, and recklessly presented things as news that were not. When not knowingly it was at least negligent when people on their own "Network" can be cited as sources to the contrary of what they present as news.

I've seen plenty of examples of one "reporter" saying something as another "reporter" has something contradictory. If both reporters work for ESPN is that the definition of "knowingly."

No, it is not overly broad. CBS news and Fox News are separate and distinct from their entertainment shows. I've never seen someone from Fox News on Married with Children or Bill O'Reilly doing a voice on the Simpsons. Similarly I never saw Walkter Kronkite on Star Trek or Katie Couric and Mike Wallace on Two and Half Men.

PtI is on Sportscenter. I've seen Marc Schlereth on Sportcenter then go on Mike and Mike. Everything from Cold Pizza to ATH is presented as news. The target is wide but contained to ESPN.

Cronkite did a very funny cameo on The Mary Tyler Moore show in the 70's. Ted Baxter wet his pants when Uncle Walter strolled into the news room. Very funny.

 

[shmessy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by castlelong1
I'll sign on as a defendant in a class action suit.
____________

Godinagreyhoodie replied:

I think you want to be the plaintiff not the defendant.
_____________

Coffee spit up ALL over my keyboard!!!!!!!

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Seriously, though, this is a terrible idea. It would make those two loons in New Jersey look sane.

 

[blackglass3]

We should also sue all the people who signed up new accounts right after the Super Bowl and crashed the board.

They make about the same amount of sense.

 

[castlelong1]

What exactly would your class action suit be for? How were you harmed? Please, be serious.

Did you read the post? I want to be compensated at minimum wage for all the time I spent fixing their crap. I guesstimate 100 hours. Heck, take my post count here alone, not the ESPN Patriots board or CHFF.com Assume 50% are about Camera-gate. I'm deadly serious, or did you miss the thread title too?

 

[castlelong1]

I think you want to be the plaintiff not the defendant. :bricks:

Thanks, see why we need a lawyer?

 

[tatepatsfan]

I don't think it is a stupid sentiment, I mean I'm livid with all this garbage going on with Walsh, it's never ending. But while this wouldn't be the worst class action ever written, it would be pretty bad. I don't think we'd find a judge in the country who'd certify it.

It's up to the Pats to bring a suit, and one is more likely against the Herald than ESPN.

 

[castlelong1]

Cronkite did a very funny cameo on The Mary Tyler Moore show in the 70's. Ted Baxter wet his pants when Uncle Walter strolled into the news room. Very funny.

Now that you mention it there were a few cameos on Murphy Brown. Point stands though. We never confused Kronkite with Ted Baxter. One was clearly News and one clearly entertainment.

 

[castlelong1]

Seriously, though, this is a terrible idea. It would make those two loons in New Jersey look sane.

I better modell is the St. Louis fans. But instead of suing a team for trying to compete, it'd be against a "Network" that clothes entertainment as news.

 

[castlelong1]

We should also sue all the people who signed up new accounts right after the Super Bowl and crashed the board.

They make about the same amount of sense.

1 I think ESPN might have more money than them, but that is just a guess.

2 Different legal principle. One is vandalism, the other reckless something latin libel/slander presented as news. (I'm pretty sure Entertainment has a different standard than news.)

Again, other than the first reply (about patfaninAZ I think) I'm waiting for someone to say, "Yup, I'm a lawyer."

If you are not, or do not know one and think this is a bad idea, don't sign on to it. Really, No guns to heads.

 

[castlelong1]

I don't think it is a stupid sentiment, I mean I'm livid with all this garbage going on with Walsh, it's never ending. But while this wouldn't be the worst class action ever written, it would be pretty bad. I don't think we'd find a judge in the country who'd certify it.

It's up to the Pats to bring a suit, and one is more likely against the Herald than ESPN.

If a lawyer would like to try, I'll not only sign on but volunteer. I have a B.A. in English and know my way around libraries.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

You don't have standing to sue. BB and Kraft do.

 

[castlelong1]

I was injured by having my time wasted by people they "educated".

Besides, to sue all you need is a lawyer and/or money.

Again, no guns to heads, those that think it is a bad idea can not sign on. If one think it is a bad idea and can not name a lawyer or are one, um why is one posting here? (I mean other than as a threadjack.)

 

[Tunescribe]

If a lawyer would like to try, I'll not only sign on but volunteer. I have a B.A. in English and know my way around libraries.

Hey! I have a B.A. in English too! Are you as poor as I am? :bricks:

 

[PatsFanInMaine]

I am a lawyer. There is a certain hurdle(the 1st Amendment) concerning the constitutionally protected right of Freedom of The Press. Sports writers and or commentators fall under that definition. In order to prevail you would have to not only prove that the stories were wrong but that they were perpetrated with extreme malice. It is not likely that you would be able to convince a judge or jury that the actions of the defendants were perpetrated with such extreme malice that they would find that their actions abridge the rights granted to the press under the 1st Amendment.

 

[NEPatriot]

Tomase is the first one whom we need to sue because he MENTIONED about Ram video walkthrough in the first place without checking his source. Unfortunately, ESPN and media halfasssss people went along with it.

After all, I know why BB hates media. Bandwagon fans are not the worst if you look at the way media handle Pats business. Unbelievable.!