5 ms·
Man Awarded $150,000 After Facebook Post Ruined His Life
- _archon_ 10y agoOK, so a guy slandered another on Facebook, claiming that the hotel owner housed pedophiles. This was found to be untrue, however the slanderer wouldn't retract his statements. Anyway, in the meantime, the hotel owner was threatened by local IRL internet white knights, to the point that he decided to move away. Now he's won damages for all this. This seems like the proper course of the legal system... I don't see why it's relevant on more than a local level. It's interesting, however, how little it takes to whip up small-minded people into a fervor. A simple (false) facebook post has enough people losing their capacity for rational thought that the target has to leave town. Also, I love the implication that ex-cons shouldn't be able to ride on public transit. "Look everybody, this guy's trying to live in a lawful manner after leaving the (penal/rehabilitative) system! Even though the closest apartment he could both get and afford is across town from the only job he could get, he shouldn't be allowed on the bus like any other paying customer!"
- headShrinker 10y agoWhile your post is sympathetic to Mister Rothe, let's not leave out the most heinous part of the story. > Afterwards, Mr Rothe was the subject of a brutal bashing that left him hospitalised for six months
- deevus 10y agoIs it just me, or is $150,000 compensation not nearly enough?
- 5asbqu90s1 10y agoI'm not sure what the correct damages are. But one thing to consider is that the people who assaulted and threatened him probably owe damages too (and would even if the accusations were true). So the $150,000 owed by the poster of the thread is not necessarily supposed to compensate him for all the damages he suffered.
- cardiffspaceman 10y agoThis man was the primary cause of the damage and if there was some way that others owed part of the damages he, the defendant, could always sue the others.