PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

What Are the Libel Laws in Indiana?


Status
Not open for further replies.
Exactly. Kravitz wasn't stating an opinion. (read the column)

He stated that Vrabel called Shula "a washed up old coach". He put it in quotations. Vrabel never said such a thing. He called the PLAYERS "washed up old players".

Black and white libel.
Actually, that isn't really "black and white libel." Libel has to be a blatently, maliciously false statement made with the intent to defame or damage.

If he wrote an article saying Mike Vrabel deals drugs, beats his wife, kicks puppies, joined the Klan and cheats on his taxes, that would be libel. Misquoting Vrabel in a minor, subtle way isn't.
 
Report the mis-quote here...

http://www2.indystar.com/help/contact/contact_us.html

Forget the libel, let's at least embarrass this hack and get his paper to print the correction.

I wouldn't expect anything less from a second rate writer from a second rate city.

Everyone please fill out that form and send it... this hack deserves to be embarrassed by his paper.

My comments...

The column by Bob Kravitz from 11/09/07 that appears on Indystar.com contains a misquote of Patriots linebacker Mike Vrabel. Not only does Kravitz misquote Vrabel, he uses that misquote as the basis for his entire column. Kravitz writes...

"Old, washed-up coach.
That must be what it says because that's what Patriots linebacker Mike Vrabel called Shula the other day."

The actual quote from Vrabel is ""I think that we try to go out there and play hard every week. And I don't think that guys are going to draw on an old retired coach and old washed up players to pump us up. We play hard. We try to go out there and play hard. That's our job every week is to go out there and play hard. To play for our team, my teammates, my coaches, the respect factor, that's what I try to go out and play for, and I think everybody else on our team does the same thing." The quote happened on a Boston radio show and was reprinted here :

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/

...under the listing of 'Vrabel on Shula'. Vrabel never said what Kravitz alleges.

I expect Kravitz or the Indy Star to print a correction or retraction. Please respond to my comment if at all possible.

The automated response I received...
We have received your paper or website content issue regarding a story or photo and have forwarded it to the Editorial department. We have asked them to get back with you as quickly as possible.

We appreciate that you have taken the time to contact us and we look forward to serving you as Indianapolis' number one media source.

Thank you,
IndyStar.com Staff

Let's see if it happens.
 
Last edited:
Actually, that isn't really "black and white libel." Libel has to be a blatently, maliciously false statement made with the intent to defame or damage.

If he wrote an article saying Mike Vrabel deals drugs, beats his wife, kicks puppies, joined the Klan and cheats on his taxes, that would be libel. Misquoting Vrabel in a minor, subtle way isn't.

What if he misquotes Vrabel, while kicking a puppy?
 
You're going by some report by a photog who spoke with a security guard:rolleyes:
Don't be such a homer. There's a lot more smoke around Indy's fire than just some anonymous security guard. These allegation go back 2 years and involve other teams besides the Patriots making them.
 
Actually, that isn't really "black and white libel." Libel has to be a blatently, maliciously false statement made with the intent to defame or damage.

Just for the record, that's not true as a blanket proposition, but true here since Mike Vrabel is a public figure. Also, it's probably worth noting that "malice" has a legal definition that is a bit less nefarious than the common non-legal understanding of the word. Moreover, "intent" is also a legal concept that means a bit less than one tends to think -- it doesn't necessarily mean "intentional." Recklessness can qualify. There also doesn't need to be an actual intent to damage, just damage (at least in some states and it depends on whether you're seeking punitive damages, but there's no constitutionally required standard here, states can do as they like.)
 
it will be accompanied by an asterisk because they stole opponents' signals.

As has been pointed out to the football-knowledge impaired so often on this site, neither the Pats, nor any other team, has ever been punished because they "stole opponents' signals". That practice is not only completely legal but is, in fact, encouraged by the NFL (as evidenced by their policy of providing films of opposing teams..including sideline footage).

What I find really interesting about all of this is that anyone continues to give attention to an individual who is either:

1) ignorant of the basic facts of his own profession: in which case his opinions on anything related to that profession should be viewed with the utmost skepticism; or

2) he chooses to purposely ignore his own integrity and the basic principles and tenets of his profession just to make a few bucks; in which case he's a fraud.

In either event, the opinions and views of such a person should be readily dismissed from any intelligent football discussion.

BTW: These are only my OPINIONS, so I assume there is no libel. :rolleyes:

but if there is ......DELETE ME QUICK MODS...I have 4 kids to feed!! :eek:
 
Last edited:
Asterisk this season, they'll just go out and win it all next year too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


MORSE: Patriots Draft Needs and Draft Related Info
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/19: News and Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf’s Pre-Draft Press Conference 4/18/24
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/18: News and Notes
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/17: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/16: News and Notes
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-14, Mock Draft 3.0, Gilmore, Law Rally For Bill 
Potential Patriot: Boston Globe’s Price Talks to Georgia WR McConkey
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/12: News and Notes
Back
Top