Way back in December of 2006, Lindsay Lohan sent out a drug fueled text telling other celebrities that they should sue the tabloids for defamation of character, even though she doesn’t know what that means.
“Let’s sue the tabloids for saying the things they say. Defamation of character. Amongst other illegal accusations, I will repeat this over and over to make my point. I am not fully aware of what these, again, accusations are, but I am fully and eagerly prepared to learn them”.
Clearly she never bothered to learn those terms, because back in March she tried (unsuccessfully) to sue E-Trade for 100 million dollars, and today (Tyler Exclusive, btw!) Dina Lohan sent a letter to Fox about last nights episode of Glee, calling it – oh you’ll never guess – “defamation of character.”
So is another lawsuit on the way? Probably, yes, because the Lohans are dumb as rocks with no source of income. It’s almost like they’re a family of possums.
Great post you fucking assclown!
It should be against the law how dumb these dipshits are. My butt-hairs are more intelligent than them. I’d still bang Lindsey though.
Since Lindsay Lohan has been slaving away in rehab, I imagine Dina Lohan will sue for reparations next.
You can’t sue for what is public knowledge. This is how momma makes money. Linsey goes to rehab mommy sells it to the today show. Linsey relapse goes back into rehab mommy sells story to today show.
if you really want to hurt the lohan family and hit them where it counts, simply STOP posting about them and STOP buying her pics from paps….It’s that simple. Take her out of the limelight, and she goes away…..
I would like to offer the creators and viewers of Glee, Ms. Dianne Lohan, and the cuntry singing fake Gwyneth Paltrow two words: Pap Smear
I would defile her character.
I would sign on for the banging of Lindsay…
Though, at the this point, instead of this post, I think the Natalie Portman Ass post should be back on top!!!
I wonder if Jew girls are easy to get to do Anal… I wonder if it all depends on size? How big is it… Perhaps it isn’t size just the quality of it…
I mean, A money roll can only be so big, but it can just have 100s instead of 20s…
Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, slander (for transitory statements), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image. It is usually a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant)
So, asking how many times Linds has been to rehab, doesnt really cover it since it was a question about a statement of fact.
She did settle with e-trade. She didn’t get the $100 mil she asked for but she got something because they were able to prove they did name the baby after her.
Where do you apply to be a fact checker for Brando?
“The main problem with proving defamation of character is the protection of free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment. Courts generally agree that an opinion, no matter how malicious, is not the same as a stated fact. If the disgruntled customer had said “Don’t eat at Joe’s Cafe. I think the food is lousy and the chef is sick,” then defamation of character would be difficult to prove. Other people can still form different opinions. Once the customer said “Don’t eat at Joe’s Cafe. I know the chef and he has AIDS,” then a statement of fact has occurred and a claim of defamation of character can be pursued.”
tl:dr: if it’s a statement of fact or a subjective opinion, it’s going to be nearly impossible to prove in court.
… fine http://i.imgur.com/D9kM3.jpg
Another problem concerning defamation of character is the actual truth of the statement. Some may argue that in order for defamation of character to occur, the alleged victim actually has to have character to defame in the first place. Calling a known neighborhood bully a ‘thug’ in the local paper wouldn’t qualify as defamation of character, because it isn’t a statement against fact. The truth is, the truthfulness of the statement isn’t always a factor in actual court proceedings. In our hypothetical case, the court would assume the chef does not in fact have AIDS and the defendant knew this at the time the statements were made.
tl:dr – http://i.imgur.com/HxhWd.jpg
On an unrelated note, Just saw the Portman arse pics.
Damn
Now this has got to be a story on here today:
http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2010/11/17/amy-erin-blakely-busts-devereux-foundation-with-large-breasts-la/?ncid=webmail
Truth is an absolute defense to libel/defamation
You seriously believe that?
Cali, the Tony Reali of WWTDD
Natalie Portmans nice body and that long brunette hair……dibs. Love the long hair, it’s totally underrated these days.
hey look, its B
Sup-Sooooo how bout them Raiders/Broncos??