Weird news regarding Matthew Judon

[Mr. Scot]

I'm reminded of Darin Gantt talking about having seen John Fox enthusiastically dragging a very reluctant Marty Hurney into a strip club during Super Bowl week.

Gantt was with another reporter who said of Fox "Does he think nobody can see him?"

Edited February 25, 2021 by Mr. Scot

[MHS831]

10 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Would somebody actually pursue charges in this? Doesn't seem like that'd stick given that it's public, but I'm not a legal scholar.

I will grant it looks pretty stupid.

I would think not, but it meets the legal definition of blackmail.  However, if damages occur as a result, a civil suit is always in style.  I teach School Law in principal prep courses, and blackmail is something we cover--which is why this jumped off the page at me when I read it.  Not a lawyer, and I would never guess how seriously this is, but here is the definition:

"the action, treated as a criminal offense, of demanding payment or another benefit from someone in return for not revealing compromising or damaging information about them."

That is EXACTLY what this is, shared on social media.  I would assume that if the reporter pushed this, it could get this far.  I do not get into the litigation stuff--just the laws and how to avoid stuff like this.  

 

[Peon Awesome]

2 hours ago, MasterAwesome said:

I read into it a little more and the allegation is that this Hensley fellow was cheating on his wife at the strip club, and these photos allegedly prove some kind of infidelity.  Otherwise simply going to a strip club isn't all that incriminating for most people lol.

Thanks brothers. You always have the inside scoop

[Aussie Tank]

3 hours ago, Riverboat Ron said:

I love bobs!

And Vagine 

[MHS831]

7 hours ago, Bama Panther said:

If it’s true, it’s not defamation at all. To qualify as defamation, the statement must be false. 

Not totally accurate-.  it is a Tort, which means a civil violation.  If you called my employer and informed him that I have a terminal disease and I am fired because they cannot afford the expected health insurance, that is defamation because you harmed me with damages while violating my right to privacy--in other words, sharing confidential information that leads to damages is a tort violation regardless of whether you can prove the allegation or not.  There might be other violations, but tort liability would necessitate your ability to convince the judge that the information was factual and not intended to benefit a third party or damage me.  You jump to the conclusion (I am assuming here for the sake of argument) that the photos proved infidelity.  Or they are contextually representing what you say.  A woman could come up to me and grab me and I could respond as a form of a joke or out of embarrassment--you have the photo--it happened--but if you share it on social media, allowing people to take it out of context or deliberately make assumptions that something nefarious is going on, then the truth is damaging and since this would be in the form of a bribe, the intent is obvious. 

In this case, does the player have actual proof that the infidelity occurred?  Messing with other women in public may be damaging because it implies marital infidelity, so if his threat was to suggest that which he assumed beyond what he witnessed, and that defamatory accusation occurred as part of a blackmail arrangement, it could be both.  Did he see intercourse between the reporter and another woman, or is he intending to imply that as a means to leverage a quid pro quo in the form of blackmail. 

Edited February 25, 2021 by MHS831

[MHS831]

12 minutes ago, Aussie Tank said:

And Vagine 

Blimey!

[Mr. Scot]

2 hours ago, Aussie Tank said:

And Vagine 

I would have said Buts.

(or maybe As)

 

Edited February 25, 2021 by Mr. Scot

[Basbear]

-50 IQ move and I like Judon

 

[Bama Panther]

3 hours ago, MHS831 said:

Not totally accurate-.  it is a Tort, which means a civil violation.  If you called my employer and informed him that I have a terminal disease and I am fired because they cannot afford the expected health insurance, that is defamation because you harmed me with damages while violating my right to privacy--in other words, sharing confidential information that leads to damages is a tort violation regardless of whether you can prove the allegation or not.  There might be other violations, but tort liability would necessitate your ability to convince the judge that the information was factual and not intended to benefit a third party or damage me.  You jump to the conclusion (I am assuming here for the sake of argument) that the photos proved infidelity.  Or they are contextually representing what you say.  A woman could come up to me and grab me and I could respond as a form of a joke or out of embarrassment--you have the photo--it happened--but if you share it on social media, allowing people to take it out of context or deliberately make assumptions that something nefarious is going on, then the truth is damaging and since this would be in the form of a bribe, the intent is obvious. 

In this case, does the player have actual proof that the infidelity occurred?  Messing with other women in public may be damaging because it implies marital infidelity, so if his threat was to suggest that which he assumed beyond what he witnessed, and that defamatory accusation occurred as part of a blackmail arrangement, it could be both.  Did he see intercourse between the reporter and another woman, or is he intending to imply that as a means to leverage a quid pro quo in the form of blackmail. 

Been a long time since my first year torts class. 

[Mr. Scot]

26 minutes ago, Bama Panther said:

Been a long time since my first year torts class. 

I like those with jelly.

[MHS831]

3 hours ago, Bama Panther said:

Been a long time since my first year torts class. 

You had a torts class!!!  One up on me!  I cover Torts in educ law--so I get a bit into it.  I call my quiz==Pop Torts.