In teaching torts, I begin my discussion of the intentional infliction of emotional distress by having students write in their notes “not everything is the infliction of emotional distress.” The reason for the cautionary line is that law students tend (particularly on exams) to call any insult an infliction of emotional distress, ignoring the elements of the tort requiring severe forms of conduct or speech to qualify. That line came to mind in reading the recent decision of the Utah Court of Appeals rejecting tort claims, including an IIED claim, in Keisel v. Westbrook. The case involves Russell Westbrook, the Thunder’s point guard who reacted angrily to the taunting of Shane Keisel, a Jazz fan, at a game in March 2019. Keisel brought an array of tort claims that have now been correctly rejected by the courts.
The incident arose during the game when Keisel (who was sitting next to his girlfriend Jennifer Huff) began to taunt Westbrook from a few rows up from the court. Keisel said something to Westbrook that included the phrase “on your knees.” … [In response], Westbrook shouted: “I swear to God, I’ll f**k you up, you and your wife, I’ll [f**k] you up, … I promise you on everything I love, on everything I love, I promise you.” As noted in the interview below, Keisel insists that he never swore at the player and was simply encouraging him to calm down.
Keisel then went to a real court to allege that he was defamed and left in a critical state of emotional distress from the encounter. Yet, on an IIED, a plaintiff must show that the defendant “(a)intentionally engaged in some conduct toward the plaintiff considered outrageous and intolerable in that it offends the generally accepted standards of decency and morality; (b) with the purpose of inflicting emotional distress or where any reasonable person would have known that such would result; and (c) that severe emotional distress resulted as a direct consequence of the defendant’s conduct.”
The court of appeals described that this tort does not arise from conduct that is merely “unreasonable, unkind, or unfair” but must be “so severe as to evoke outrage or revulsion.” In other words, not everything is the intentional infliction of emotional distres.
Even with the claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress, the conduct must “must be severe; it must be such that a reasonable person, normally constituted, would be unable to adequately cope with the mental stress engendered by the circumstances of the case.” Thus, even though the outrageous conduct is not needed as an element, it still covers conduct well beyond the pale to establish a severe response.
Moreover, the court rejects the claim that the couple felt physically intimidated by Westbrook’ words.
“when confronted with claims like these, a court must be capable of distinguishing between actual threats of violence and something that was merely profane posturing. Here as elsewhere, context is key.
As recognized by the district court, Westbrook’s outburst occurred “in the presence of security personnel and thousands of spectators,” and Westbrook was separated from Keisel and Huff by several rows of spectators. As also recognized by the district court, Keisel and Huff then ‘remained in the Arena to watch the rest of the game,’ a choice that belies any suggestion that they really thought there was a ‘real risk that Westbrook would make good on his threat.'”
Similarly, the court rejects vague claims of a “power imbalance between them and Westbrook.”
The court correctly notes that such exchanges are regrettable but not actionable in our society:
“Profane outbursts are of course unfortunate and disfavored in civil society. But even so, courts commonly hold that, without something more, a profane outburst isn’t enough to sustain an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim. See, e.g., McGrew v. Duncan, 333 F. Supp. 3d 730, 742–43 (E.D. Mich. 2018); Jiminez v. CRST Specialized Transp. Mgmt., Inc., 213 F. Supp. 3d 1058, 1065–66 (N.D. Ind. 2016); Walker v. Mississippi Delta Comm’n on Mental Health, No. 4:11CV044, 2012 WL 5304755, at *9–10 (N.D. Miss. Oct. 25, 2012); Lawson v. Heidelberg E., 872 F. Supp. 335, 336, 338–39 (N.D. Miss. 1995); Groff v. Southwest Beverage Co., Inc., 997 So. 2d 782, 787 (La. Ct. App. 2008); Lombardo v. Mahoney, No. 92608, 2009 WL 3649997, at *1–2 (Ohio Ct. App. Nov. 5, 2009). And while we’re aware of no similar case that arose in the negligent infliction of emotional distress context, we believe that a similar result would likely be reached if such outbursts were assessed under the “severe” conduct rubric that’s used in such cases.
Moreover, in assessing any emotional distress claim, a court must of course consider the context in which the offending conduct occurs. Words that might be outrageous or severe if spoken at a funeral may well be interpreted differently if they are spoken by the proverbial sailors at sea….
Westbrook’s outburst occurred at a professional sporting event, a place where society has unfortunately come to expect some amount of intemperate behavior. And the outburst at issue also wasn’t unprovoked. Again, Keisel admitted that Westbrook was responding to an initial statement from Keisel that could have been understood as a sexual if not homophobic slur. These details of course change the calculus as to whether Westbrook’s response was so outrageous or severe that it could support an emotional distress claim.
…
[P]laintiffs must necessarily be expected and required to be hardened to a certain amount of rough language, and to occasional acts that are definitely inconsiderate and unkind. There is no occasion for the law to intervene in every case where someone’s feelings are hurt. There must still be freedom to express an unflattering opinion, and some safety valve must be left through which irascible tempers may blow off relatively harmless steam.[“] While this comment from the Restatement [of Torts] was directed at the “outrageousness” element of an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, the sentiment has some natural bearing on the “severe” element of a negligent infliction claim as well. And it largely explains why the profane statements from Westbrook do not support the claims at issue.
We certainly don’t condone what Westbrook said. Sports and society alike would be better off without such language. And for that matter, the other fans who were sitting nearby deserved far better from both Westbrook and Keisel. These two adults could and should have found a way to disagree better.”
With that, Westbrook succeeded in a slam dunk on all of the tort claims.
I was able to find this video of Keisel after the altercation. He denies any swearing or seriously taunting the player. He also calmly recounts how his comments were an effort to get Westbrook to calm down and that there was no provocation on their part. That could well be the case, but it does not help establish these tort claims. Indeed, the video could also be seen as undermining the claim that he was experiencing severe emotional distress after the encounter:
Here is the opinion: Keisel v. Westbrook
Updated 12/26 Lefty Wall of Shame aka The Lefty Turd Farm
The final tally for 2023 is here. Dennis aka Mr Alpha Bank has increased his hold on 2nd over The Lawn Boy, but Svelaz aka Mr Peetape still holds a commanding lead. (thanks anon for reminding me I needed to update)
Svelass aka Mr Peetape 22
Dennis McInlyre 9
Lawn Boy Elvis Bug 7
Gigi the LIAR 4
ATS 3
brandrunnerPoopy Head 1
Most Confederate soldiers were poor sharecroppers—-Dennis McInlyre aka Mr Alpha Bank
In Mcdonnell, SCOTUS narrowed the definition of what constitutes a benefit—Svelaz aka Mr Peetape
Gifts and payments to family are not “official acts” with regard to Joe Biden—Mr Peetape
(confusing quid with quo)
The 14th Amendment argument was put forth by the Federalist Society—Mr Peetape
It will be up to a GRAND JURY to decide if Hunter is guilty of contempt—-Svelaz aka
Mr Peetape
2 USC 192 is a congressional rule—Svelaz aka Mr Peetape
Congressional rules trump the 6th Amendment—Mr Peetape
Convictions for tax evasion are rare (its 2 per day)—-Mr Peetape
The inflation rate is coming down and is at 2.5% (it’s 3.1% and steady, 12/12/23)—brandrunner aka Poopy Head
Hunter and his lawyer have said they would comply with the subpoena—Dennis McInlyre aka Mr Alpha Bank
The 5th Amendment cannot be invoked in a court or criminal proceeding—Svelaz aka Mr Peetape
Hunter won’t testify. He will plead the 5th. (12/15)—Svelaz, aka Mr Peetape
Hunter wants to testify. He is not trying to hide anything. (12/18)—Svelaz aka Mr Peetape
A President can’t be convicted of a crime unless there is no doubt—Svelaz aka Mr. Peetape
R.C.A.W.T. was a good pneumonic—- Elvis Bug aka The Lawn Boy
(its mnemonic)
Nuclear ICBM’s are more accurate, the closer you are to the target.—*Elvis Bug aka The Lawn Boy
Hunter doesn’t have to testify because Comer changed his mind—Dennis aka Mr Alpha Bank
The quid has to be illegal for a quid pro quo to be illegal—-*Elvis bug aka The Lawn boy
If Joe’s quid results in Hunter’s quo, that’s not illegal—-*Elvis Bug aka The Lawn Boy
Inflation was on a rising trend from 2015 until Trump left office—-Elvis Bug aka The Lawn Boy
(1.3, 2.2, 2.5, 1.9, 1.3)
Comer said that the mere presence of shell companies is *proof* of a crime—-Svelass aka Mr. Peetape
Hunter Biden showed up for his hearing today—–Svelass aka Mr. Peetape
Hunter Biden agreed to testify to a public hearing—–Gigi the LIAR
(who did he agree with?)
The Consumer Price Index was indeed at 7.6% when Trump left office—–Elvis Bug aka The Lawn Boy (it was 1.4%)
Archer gave no details about the meeting at the Naval Observatory with Marc Holtzman—-Svelaz aka Mr Peetape
Archer had no idea what was on those phone calls. He admitted it under oath—Svelaz aka Mr Peetape
Evidence isnt permissible unless its incontrovertible—-ATS
Circumstantial evidence alone is not enough to convict——Svelaz aka Mr Peetape
Republicans are the only ones calling for violence these days—-Dennis
Democrats call for violence when the cause is right—-Dennis in the same post
Gas prices spiked because Texas uses crude oil to make electricity—-Gigi the LIAR
AR-15’s ruin the meat—-Dennis
The inflation rate was 8% when Trump left office—-Gigi the LIAR
(it was actually 1.4%)
Biden only released the strategic oil reserve once—-Svelass Mr Peetape
Archer never said it was Joe that was called from Dubai—-ATS
The State of Florida does property tax “appraisals”—-Svelass Mr Peetape
You can’t convict without incontrovertible proof—ATS
Trump was convicted of rape—Svelass Mr. Peetape
The Jefferson County school board has a supermajority of republicans—-lawn boy EB
Trumps attorney forgot to “check a box”——Dennis
An insult or name calling is not a personal attack—-Svelass Mr. Peetape
The DC NG answers only to the President—-Gigi the LIAR
Christianity teaches to treat your fellow man the same way you treat Jesus—-Svelass Mr Peetape
The ideal athlete is 6’2” and 175#—-Dennis
There is no way a fat person can shoot a 67 in golf—-Dennis
“Bright red Alabama is the “wild west”,” (when its bright blue Birmingham that accounts for 95% of the gun violence in Alabama)—-Dennis
That’s why McCarthy didn’t hold a vote. He was going to, but upon realizing he didn’t have the votes he chose not to hold one.—-Mr Peetape
McCarthy never said he didn’t have the votes.—-Mr Peetape.
*These statements are attributed to the booger eater, because they were posted by a green anonymous. If that clown wants to step up and claim ownership, I will change attribution.
When is Dennis McIntyre going to apologize for his ignorant comment about sharecroppers prior to the Civil War?
Instead he just moves onto his next lie about the signatories to an amicus.
He repeats it again here, after being called out in a previous post.
+100
Mommy
Please make Tom/Estovir stop skull fvcking me!!!!!!!!!!!!!
—–turdrunner
Steaming turd from turdrunner below VVVV
DID YOU SAY, “REJECTING CLAIMS?”
“OUR COUNTRY”
“[I am] so sick and tired of OUR COUNTRY funding and supporting a genocide…”
– Rashida Tlaib
_________________
“We the People of the United States…secure the Blessings of Liberty to OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY….”
– American Founders, Preamble to the U.S. Constitution, 1789
__________________________________________________________________
Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795, 1798 and 1802 (four clear iterations) Persisting Until Lincoln’s “Reign of Terror”
United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” March 26, 1790
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a FREE WHITE PERSON, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof…
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Well, Tonto, old friend, it looks like they’ve got us surrounded.”
– Lone Ranger.
“What do you mean, ‘we,’ white man?”
– Tonto
“…capable of distinguishing between actual threats of violence and something that was merely profane posturing”
HOW DOES A PERSON DO THAT ?
Especially when confronted by a
shout of :
“I swear to God, I’ll f**k you up, you and your wife, I’ll [f**k] you up, … I promise you on everything I love, on everything I love, I promise you.” ????
Is speech like that quote “merely profane posturing”?
Go away pansy
@ Anonymous
News Flash >
Is it intelligent to respond to honest questions & concerns with insults?
OT
Real President Donald J. Trump must go full-savage “Lincoln” if he is reelected and save the American thesis (i.e. freedom and self-reliance), the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, actual Americans, and America.
Trump must be defeated by voters again. He’s a sick and dangerous man.
I’m so glad you completely agree that Real President Donald J. Trump must go full-savage “Lincoln” if he is reelected and save the American thesis (i.e. freedom and self-reliance), the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, actual Americans, and America.
Troll^^^^^
He is so dangerous that he set the FBI and DOJ on his enemies, provoked two wars – one with a nuclear armed superpower.
Is constantly sniffing women’s hair, and has children who are million dollar a years coke addicts and sex traffickers.
Jonathan: As we head into the New Year perhaps we should discuss the court docket–the possible sequence of trials DJT is facing in 2024. It’s full of possibilities.
DJT’s whole strategy is to try to postpone his criminal and civil cases until after the election. That may work in the Mar-a-Lago docs case because Judge Cannon, a DJT appointee and firm supporter, is dragging her feet in that case. She is doing her best to postpone her trial until it runs into DOJ policy that prohibits criminal prosecutions of a candidate for public office.
But this gambit might not work in other criminal cases against DJT. Considering possible delays due to appeals in Jack Smith case, this might open a window for Fani Willis to move her state RICO case against DJT and others forward to sometime in February, March or April. Willis has asked for a trial date in August but there is nothing to prevent her from asking for an earlier date. A simplified trial of just DJT, Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman could be completed way before the election. Willis is probably waiting to see the outcome of the DC appeals case. The Court of Appeals is expected decide within days of the Jan. 9 oral arguments. If SCOTUS decides to take the case on an expedited basis we could expect a ruling quickly–as happened in the Gore v. Bush case that took only 72 hours for a ruling.
Of course, SCOTUS could decide not to hear the appeal. In which case Judge Chutkan could proceed with her case with a few weeks delay. That means Fani Willis would have to delay her trial. But I doubt SCOTUS will punt. It is too important a case to avoid ruling.
For those who say DJT won’t go to trial in any of his cases before the election stay tuned. The court calendar for 2024 is full of possibilities!
Dennis, there is no need to cover every case. They are all a part of slimy Democrats, and their slimy followers attempt to misuse the justice system. Trump will be found innocent of all criminal charges. Then, we can consider how to manage those slimy folk who misuse the law. You have nothing to say about any of these cases that is worthwhile, for if you did, you wouldn’t run away from the discussion.
Absolutely Dennis – delay is PART of Trump’s strategy – it is NOT the Whole strategy.
It is likely the most important part of his strategy – because as most fo the country grasps – he will not get a fair hearing in NYC, Fulton County or DC.
Regardless, it is a strategy that is working.
Further the “get Trump”strategy of the left is backfiring.
Why ?
Because voters – especially independents and some democrats see it for what it is – weaponized political lawfare of a candidate and party who are too weak to win at the ballot box.
I would further note the “by any means necescary”
approach to “get Trump” – all by itself casts grave doubt on the lefts claims regarding the 2020 election and J6.
More than 50% of the country either does not beleive your claims, or does not care.
More than 50% of the country either beleives you cheated in 2020, or that even If Trump was wrong – even if he lied about 2020, that it is still evident that Trump is the better person to be president in 2024.
A substantial part of that is because of YOUR failure to govern.
Trump’s presidency was chaotic, yet in the midst of that chaos, life outside of politics improved for ordinary americans.
Wages rose, prices did not, the economy grew stably and steadily.
The world made progress towards greater peace and less US forces fighting and dying accross the world.
For all the political chaos of the Trump presidency. outside of politics most trends were towards peace, stability, “sustainable” growth.
More so than any president since Reagan, Trump brought peace and calm and order and stability to everything outside the politics of washington.
And an increasing number of people want that back.
Biden was elected on the promise to end the political chaos in washington that appeared to be amplified by Trump.
He not only failed to do so, he not only made it worse, not better, but he reintroduced chaos into the ordinary lives of people.
We have more war, we have more reason to fear our government, we have prices growing faster than wages, the economy on a yoyo,
we have the greatest fear of nuclear armagedon we have had since the 60’s.
And we have the Biden administration – which can not manage to get anything right weaponizing govenrment – nto just against its political oponents, but against ordinary people who dare to disagree.
Trump makes a point at his rallies that HE is what is between the Left and the rest of us – and you fail to understand that message is a winning message – Because not only do people beleive – you are coming for them next – you have actually done so.
John Say,
Well said and spot on.
John Say: If I didn’t know better I would think you were a paid political operative for the DJT campaign–making all sorts of claims you cannot back up.
DJT’s WHOLE strategy is delay, delay and delay some more. In the Jack Smith indictment he asked the SC for an expedited hearing on the issue of criminal immunity. DJT argued “Wait a minute, haste makes waste”–he wanted the Court to take time to deliberate and deliberate on that important issue. Delay! DJT also asked the judge in the second E. Jean Carroll for a 90-day stay in those proceedings. It was denied. It’s all about delay! If DJT actually thought he had a winning hand in any of his cases he would say “Show me your cards. Let’s get on with the game!” It’s only the prosecutors who want a speedy trial–the very RIGHT DJT is entitled under the 6th Amendment. So if delay is not DJT’s WHOLE strategy please explain the other part.
And DJT WILL get a “fair hearing” in all his trials–the right to an impartial jury, the right to present his own evidence and the right to cross examine witnesses–the right every criminal defendant is entitled to under our system of justice. DJT wants delays because he knows he knows he has a weak hand on the law and the evidence.
And to try to buttress your feeble claims you say “50% of the country…believes you cheated in 2020,…”. That’s not what the polls show. Recent polling ( e.g., CNN) in November show 60-61% of Americans believe Biden won the election fairly. DJT claims “about 80% of the country complain because there was a rigged election”. No polls there–just a false claim. So get your facts straight before you make a claim you cannot back up!
Dennis, re: Trump’s strategy of delay, not sure if you saw this, re: one way that his attempt to delay might be interrupted: https://jonathanturley.org/2023/12/30/ai-did-it-disbarred-michael-cohen-admits-to-filing-fake-case-citations-to-get-early-release-from-supervision/comment-page-2/#comment-2352953
Dennis
Please post your apology for lying about sharecroppers earlier.
Thank you
I am not paid by anyone – but I am perfectly happy if someone wants top pay me to say what I am going to say anyway.
There is nothing wrong with getting paid – especially for delivering the truth.
Regardless rather than pretend you are clairvoyant and can read other peoples minds – why not stick to the facts.
Next – Smith did not ask the SC for anything in an indictment – he asked when he tried to short circuit due process and jump the queue on Trump’s appeal into he Supreme court.
That alone is proof Trump will not get a fair trial.
Regardless, there is little doubt that Trump will get convicted in DC.
Gulliania was bankrupted by a defamation lawsuit that is meritless – the plantiffs were election officials and Gulliani’s remarks were during a legal hearing where defamation does not apply. Further Read Turley’s remarks about intentional infliction of emotional distress – they also apply to defamation. Third party liability is pretty much forestalled by the law.
Nor is that even close tot he issues. The Plantiffs sued in DC – which is not where the plantiffs, live, not where the defendant lives, not where the alleged defamation took place. Put Simply – Judge Corrupt Howell has no business taking the case.
Further Howell – Like Judge Ergon in NY – skipped over the actual trial and jumped to the penalty phase. Guiliani was entitled to argue that his remarks were true – which they were.
Or do you think that Trump should be able to sue Clinton in TX ?
I would note you think Trump has no immunity claim – then Why can’t Trump sue Adam Schiff ? Robert Mueller ? Peter Strzok ?
Any number of others in DOJ/FBI/… for defamation over Russiagate ?
There remarks were defamatory, they were FALSE. The KNEW they were false at the time they made them.
And the damage was significant.
Please – enough with the fair trial nonsense – no one beleives you.
Wow – a CNN poll 3 years after the fact. Rassmussen has been pollling this since the election – the confidence int the 2020 election has been declining since shortly after J6. Rassmussen never polled confidence int he election at 50% or above.
Regardless – using YOUR poll – 40% of americans beleive our current president won Fraudulently – do you understand how Bad that is ?
I know you left wing nuts PRETEND to beleive in democracy, but in the real world – based on past experience and evidence – if 11% – not 40% not 80%, but just 11% of people STRONGLY oppose the government on something – the government will ultimately FAIL.
Ordinary contracts are not binding unless both parties agree.
The Social contract – the foundation fo the legitimacy of government does not require unanimous consent – atleast that is what we have decided. But the FACT is the majority of people can not impose their will by force on the minority and expect things to work.
During the american revolution the contry was split 3 ways – 1/3 supported the british – some even fought for the british.
1/3 were fence sitters and 1/3 supported independence – and here we are 250 years later – independent.
Why ? Because govenrments that have 1/3 of the country seriously pissed FALL.
You say Trump can get a fair trial ? How – even buy YOUR arguments – 40% of the people beleive the election was stolen.
That means a representative fair and impartial jury would just by random chance have 4-5 members that beleive the election was stolen. Do you think those will give a $chiff about Smiht’s arguments ?
And you left wing nuts still can not state an actual crime that Trump has allegedly committed.
There is no crime of attempting to overturnan election. There is no crime of challenging an election.
If there was along list of democrats would be wearing orange jumpsuits.
Smith is already in court arguing that Trump can not present his own evidence.
Trump’s wants delays because there is really only one Bad scenario for him – a conviction close tot he election – without time for a successful appeal before the election.
I would make predictions – but the fact is these trials will not take place.
They will not occur before the election. Most people grasp that they should not.
Hunter has been under investigation for what a decade now, with 2 indictments – do you think Hunter will see trial – ever ?
Hunter’s lawyers have been suing and appealing right and left – and that is Hunter’s right – it is called due process.
In case you are clueless, it is highly unlikely that Hunter or James or any other Biden appears before the house impeachment committe and does anything except take the 5th.
The Biden’s have been delaying the day of reckoning for almost 10 years.
And your ranting about Trump.
If there were no election – these trials would not be taking place.
Even if they did – the left would be trying to go slow – not fast.,
If in some mythical world Trump was convicted he has an excellent probability of winning on appeal.
The Carroll proceeding is another perfect example of the inability of democrats to actually have a fair trial – or to consider the unintendende consequences of their nonsense
That trial only took place because NY passed a law that temporarily opened the window for antique claims.
The case never should have gone to court – but now Eric Adam’s is hoist by democrats petard.
Carrol made no public report of this for over a decade. She purportedly told one friend twice privately – but that testimony was not credible. Ultimately even the NY Jury did not by Carol’s rape claim – instead finding Trump Defamed carol.
Except that absent finding a rape took place, there can be no defamation.
Carol has had no problem accusing people of rape int he past She wrote a biography in which she accused over 40 men of having raped her – yet never mentioned Trump
Carol could not put Trump in Bergdorfs 3 decades later.
Dennis – you write “DJT will get a ‘fair hearing’ in all his trials – the right to an impartial jury[.]” I assume this is a joke. This statement is coming from someone who tells us that Trump is the new Hitler. But it is possible that Trump will get a fair hearing in the appellate courts, outside of New York.
Dennis – you are engaged in wishful thinking.
The odds of bringing a case to trial before the election are near zero.
While it is highly likely that SCOTUS will hear Trump’s appeal from the DC appealte court on immunity – Because that is both an issue of great importance, and a very complex question that does not have the simple answers that you pretend. Which BTW is also why there is little chance they decide it quickly. Nor – despite your idiocy are they going to decide there is no such thing as presidential or govenrment immunity.
I know that the TDS is strong in you – but they are not going to completely obliterate immunity – because as with all issues that SCOTUS decides – this is NOT about Trump. It is about the constitution, and the rule of law. There are consequences of any decision that SCOTUS makes on immunity that go far beyond Trump. As ONE example can the citizens of Israel prosecute Biden for providing Iran money which contributed to the terrorists acts of Oct 7 ?
It is highly unlikely that SCOTUS will refuse cert on this case.
It is highly unlikely they will decide the immunity issue quickly.
It is highly unlikely when they do they will give Trump what he wants.
It is highly unlikely when they do they will give Smith what he wants.
Next – although Trump has NOT as of yet filed a claim of immunity in the Willis case – the immunity claim applies there too.
Meadows already as an immunity claim that is headed to the supreme court eventually.
Any expectation that Willis is going to proceed rapidly are wishful thinking.
You have pissed on Cannon – for doing what courts always do and proceeding with caution.
I would note that thoug it has gotten little fan fare – the Judge in the GA case is NOT some Trump republican.
But he is also not some left wing nut like Chuktan, or Ergron or Howelll.
It is highly unlikely that the Judge in GA is going to rush a very complex case.
I would also note that Willis’s case is slowly coming apart. Chesboro and Powell have been deposed,
and they were “highly cooperative” – while giving Willis the Finger.
Their guilty please – as well as the Ellis and other plea were actually disasters.
It is increasingly evident that all the Willis guilty please so far are political theater with no legal consequence.
Willis ceded all leverage against Powell, Chesborro, and Ellis in return for one positive news cycle, and now she has nothing to show.
A typical simple prosecution takes from 18-24 months to get to trial. A complex Rico case with 19 defendants takes years.
Not only do you have all the requirements of due process – but Willis herself must have the case ready for trial.
Right now it is likely that is she tried to rush into court – Trump and other defendants could spend months whittling away at charges, and removing various defendants and deposing witnesses.
Put simply if Willis was able to schedule a trial shortly – she might well lose it before selecting a jury.
You presume that because Willis managed to get an indictment that she is anywhere near actually ready for trial – or that she ever will be.
I would note the same is true of Smith in DC. But Smith atleast has a bat Schiff crazy judge cooperating with him.
Dennis, Perhaps we shouldn’t. Have a nice meal, something nice to drink with friends ands family and give it a rest. There is more to life than obsessing about the 45th President of the United States. 2024 will be an interesting and important time in history.
I hope you and your family have a great New Year’s Eve. The United States is in a time of crisis. We should not be playing “gotcha” but should seek candidates who can actually solve problems.
E.M. And the same to you and your family. Believe me when I say I’m not “obsessing” about No. 45. I would much rather discuss other important issues–like the climate change crisis, Biden’s support for Netanyahu’s extermination war against the Palestinians, the war in Ukraine, how to deal with my empty-headed brother-in-law–all sorts of issues that need attention.
Unfortunately, DJT is alive and well and wants to be president again. Had he just quietly retired like Jimmy Carter I would have let him rest in peace. But he didn’t do that. He tried to foment an insurrection to stay in power. He refused to accept the peaceful transfer of power. He wants to be an authoritarian without any accountability. That’s contrary to the Constitution and the laws of the land. His election strategy is to divide and rule rather than unite us. Divide us by race, religion and ethnicity–try to get us to fight among ourselves rather than uniting behind common goals and addressing the real problems we face.
I agree the country is in “crisis”. I would gladly vote for for someone other than DJT–or Joe Biden. Have any one in mind?
“Unfortunately, DJT is alive”
Dennis, you enter the world of Stalin along with the world of Beria. I see your culture of death extends from the newborns to anyone you disagree with.
“He tried to foment an insurrection to stay in power. ”
Does reality not exist in your world? Trump walked out of the White House as all other Presidents did.
“He refused to accept the peaceful transfer of power. ”
That is one of your typical lies. Trump left in peace.
“He wants to be an authoritarian without any accountability.”
Another lie. Did Trump weaponize the DOJ? No, your authoritarian friends did, and we have proof of that, while you have no evidence for your claim.
“That’s contrary to the Constitution and the laws of the land.”
You keep lying. What the Democrats have done is contrary to the Constitution. Most should consider you a fool or a liar, but I think you are both. Whether you do so for pay, as others state, is another story and not important. What is of consequence is that you almost never prove what you say to be true, and will repeat the lie even after proof is provided that you are lying.
“His election strategy is to divide and rule rather than unite us.”
Are you deaf and illiterate, as well as a fool and a liar? Did you not listen to Obama and Biden?
“Divide us by race, religion and ethnicity”
That is why Biden decided to call Catholics terrorists.
Dennis, nothing you write here is true. It is nothing more than one lie after another. That is mainly true of everything else you write. Why anyone using a thinking brain would listen to you, even if they have some agreement, only shows a group that when others speak, your group places their fingers in their ears and sings “La la la.”
“. . . sequence of trials DJT is facing . . .”
The Left resurrects Beria — and without a hint of shame.
“Jack Smith case”
Is that the same Jack Smith who used the IRS to persecute conservatives?
Why does the Left chronically ignore Smith’s sordid history? Could it be that they’re trying to hide something? Get away with something? Destroy something?
When is Dennis McIntyre going to apologize for his ignorant comment about sharecroppers prior to the Civil War?
Instead he just moves onto his next lie about the signatories to an amicus.
He repeats it again here, after being called out in a previous post.
Did the Thunder organization and/or NBA do anything with Westbrook? I am NOT saying that either should have, but asking out of curiosity, because so many athletes, coaches, and celebrities are severely penalized (fired, made to resign, made to apologize, cancellation of shows and book deals, etc.) even if someone simply claims that he or she used an offensive word or made an offensive joke or comment, even if the alleged conduct was years ago.
@ russamgirl
Westbrook was traded by the Ok Thunder back in 2018/19(?) to the LA Clippers. It had nothing to do with this case Turley writes about.
In fact, during a recent Clippers loss @ the Ok Thunder, Westbrook went out of his way to say it was ‘like coming home’ and ‘Thunder fans’ are the best in the world!
*I think Turley was just using this story to make the point “not everything is the infliction of emotional distress.”
Jonathan: Wow, a verbal confrontation at a Jazz/Thunder game! That’s the best you can up with today? A discussion of intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress seems better suited for the classroom.
What we expected was a discussion of the most important constitutional issue confronting the courts in decades— whether a president is immune from criminal prosecution. You have yet to weigh in on the issue despite the fact that the DC Court of Appeals will be holding oral arguments on Jan. 9. The loser will appeal to SCOTUS.
Sixteen Republican former prosecutors and office holders–along with legal scholars–have submitted an amicus brief arguing DJY is not immune. Jack Smith just submitted his brief in which he argued: “Separation-of-powers principles, constitutional text, history and precedent all make clear that a former President may be prosecuted for criminal acts he committed while in office—including, most critically here, illegals acts to remain in power despite losing an election”.
Perhaps, you are waiting to see how the DC Court of Appeals rules before offering your opinion. But the betting odds of many legal scholars is that the Court will upholding Judge Chutkan’s ruling that DJT is not immune and will rule within days of the oral arguments. Maybe you have remained silent because you would have to admit a president is not immune from criminal prosecution. That would not sit well with your Fox audience or with you loyal supporters on this blog. But that’s not what we expect from someone who is not adverse to controversy on other important issues–like the Colorado SC decision holding DJT is not qualified to be on the state’s primary ballot.
Come on, Jonathan, we are dying to know your position.
“….we are dying to know your position.”
Once a pushy bottom, always a pushy bottom
We know Denny’s position. Its standing behind his 8 year old victim who is bent over a hobby horse.
When is Dennis McIntyre going to apologize for his ignorant comment about sharecroppers prior to the Civil War?
Instead he just moves onto his next lie about the signatories to an amicus.
Dennis: You missed the obvious inferences in your quest to be a troll.
Dennis – will you join me in requesting Prof Turley to discuss the defamation case being built by Elon Musk against Media Matters? You probably have inside knowledge regarding the actions of Media Matters in this matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqGPL7o2dF8
The left is pushing a new Jim Crow.
With the Colorado Supreme Court Decision combined with the Secretary of State’s Decision….the Professor turns to a senseless detour to comment upon a spat between some folks at a basketball game?
Today’s blog entry is a very good way of beginning a course on Torts as part of a Law Student’s education but I seem to think a much more broadly welcomed article would be a discussion of the two Decisions in Colorado and Maine.
For sure that is the discussion I am awaiting to. hear from the Good Professor…..not something that has absolutely no impact upon my Life.
If you ever see me at a NBA or NFL game of any kind at any time….call the Police and report an armed kidnapping with me being the victim.
Oh the other hand I want to be seen at a Polling Booth where I can enjoy doing my civic duty as a Citizen by voting for the Candidate of my choice…..and not the slate decided by two unelected officials.
For the slow….Colorado was 4/3…..one Justice made the difference. In Maine….it was one political hack that made the decision. 1+1 does equal 2 when figured that way.
Does the Supreme Court take up the cases? Will yet again a single person sway the Decision and decide an election ahead of the voting?
Bad enough it happens after the vote when Courts refuse to hear cases challenging a particular state, county, precinct results and offering forensic evidence to support the challenge.
I see few examples of Profiles in Courage these days and that is what shall spell the end of the Great Experiment that demands principled Leaders, Judges, Justices, and Prosecutors.
Is it over and we just have not realized it?
Let hope I”m I am in.
All I want to do is change my E-Mail Address. I have been a member for years under my email …..ccousins1@cfl.rr.com MY new address Chcousins25@gmail.com
Can you change it ????
Let’s not ignore the fact the that Keisel instigated the confrontation. Westbrook did not pick him at random. People should not be protected from or rewarded for their stupidity.
That what amount to claims of fragility are even making it to court are telling, though thank goodness some sanity prevails. Heaven help us when the fragiles we have created are lawyers or judges. We’ve already seen the effects in city councils and boardrooms, even congress to a small extent, and it is quite an omen, indeed. 😐
Maybe he needs a little cheese with his “whine.”
They weren’t at a restaurant having a nice quiet dinner.
Dear Prof Turley,
Good. I am only happy there still are some black-robed squatting Toads of torts left to lick the litigious flys off the ‘intentional infliction’ of harm.
It’s a Ball Game! .. . that’s the ‘context’.
I’m reminded of the story of the Mountain and the Mole hill*. [Mount Biden vs the Trump Mole hill 2024!]
People say all sorts of things. If I told you my heart leaps like a gazelle on the plains of the Serengeti to read your pitifully miss-spelled commentary, that does not mean my heart is actually ‘leaping’. It’s a figure of speech. An intellectual reality, .. you may git a few litters wronge, but I no what you meen.
*Happy New Year
If anyone responds to this ignorant twat below about nukes, i will personally fvck you up, and your wife and children.
That’s how genocide Joe resolves disagreements in debates (spit) and on the campaign trail. A nasty piece of work. Probably posts on Turley’s blog under an ‘anonymous’ alias.
*my (ex) wife could whip Joe Biden all week long .. . and twice on Sundays,
While the Court reached the correct decision, this was a complete waste of everyone’s time. Today’s Amerika has become pretty thin-skinned Jonathan.
Given the crap-fest that is bound to follow, I can’t help but wonder if Professor Turley knows how ironic it is to even broach the subject of intentional infliction of emotional distress on his blog.
Lmao if you get emotional distress from a blog you should use the screen name Keitel
I don’t get it. Is that Harvey or Wilhelm?
Oops!
Free speech runs both ways. The plaintiff felt empowered to verbally abuse Westbrook but couldn’t take it when the tables were turned.
The disgrace is that this was even allowed to proceed.
I don’t get it. Is that Harvey or Wilhelm?