Arpaio Sues NYT For Libel Over Column Calling Him 'Truly Sadistic Man'

[leftynyc]

Source: Talking Points Memo

Former Arizona sheriff and failed Senate candidate Joe Arpaio has filed a lawsuit against The New York Times and one of its opinion writers over a piece published in August that mocked Arpaio’s political and criminal record and called him a “truly sadistic man.”


In the complaint, flagged by Politico, Arpaio acknowledges the article is an “opinion piece,” but said it contains “several false, defamatory factual assertions” about Arpaio’s storied career discriminating against Latino citizens in Maricopa County, Arizona when he was sheriff. Arpaio is seeking $147.5 million in damages and has requested a jury trial.

Read more: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/arpaio-sues-nyt-libel

---

Doesn't this moron realize that the discovery process is going to bury him?

[PJMcK]

1. Your question was my first thought, too (n/t)

[mahatmakanejeeves]

2. "Arpaio is seeking $147.5 million in damages...."

That number seems oddly specific. How did he arrive at that?

[Gothmog]

3. This is a really dumb lawsuit

Link to tweet

[Tommy_Carcetti]

11. Well, he actually did commit a real crime, and was convicted for it.

Luckily, his fellow sadist Donald came in and got him off the hook.

[Stallion]

15. I Agree-Its Political Opinion of Public Figure Protected by 1st Amendment

literally thousands of more defamatory comments on the web every day

[lagomorph777]

32. "Truly sadistic" is not accurate - should say "truly sadistic and demented."

No wonder Arpaio is pissed off.

[Grins]

4. Sue? Sure. Just as soon as he gets back from brothel owner Dennis Hof's funeral...

The Nevada Independent yesterday:

Nevada brothel owner and Assembly candidate Dennis Hof, ....who proclaimed himself the “Trump of Pahrump” died just two days after his 72nd birthday.

Just hours earlier, Hof celebrated his birthday along with longtime friend and pornographic actor Ron Jeremy, former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist.

Poor Dennis. To be named in the same company as Arpaio and Norquist....

[GWC58]

5. Sheriff Joe got his marching orders from

Dear Leader. 👿

[leftynyc]

6. The Times' lawyers

are rubbing their hands together with glee.

[Le Gaucher]

7. awww .. butt hurt is he?

[cstanleytech]

8. He has no hope in hell at winning so I wonder if this for publicity with the goal being to

keep his name floating among like minded bigoted voters as he is thinking of running for another political office?

[AJT]

27. He's probably broke and wants to use the suit to raise money for his

"legal fees".

[cstanleytech]

28. That is certainly possible and there are unfortunately plenty of gullible fools

in this country that would do it.

[rsdsharp]

9. Uh, Joe . . .

Never mind the holding of Sullivan v. New York Times regarding the high standard of proof for defamation of public figures. Truth is an absolute defense. You ARE truly sadistic. We can quibble about whether you're a man or just a prick.

[They_Live]

10. I wonder

how they arrived at that amount for damages?

[KWR65]

12. He is going to end up paying NYT's Legal Bill.

He is a public person that was convicted of a crime running for a political office. Is he filing pro se?

[leftynyc]

13. If he's stupid enough

to be his own lawyer, he deserves what's about to happen to him even more.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

29. His lawyer is Larry Klayman, right-winger and perpetually unsuccessful

bringer of frivolous defamation cases. He'd probably be better off pro se than with Larry Klayman.

[Tobin S.]

14. "Arpaio Sues NYT for Telling the Truth"

[JohnnyRingo]

16. $147m in Damages?

Regardless the merits of his case, I'm not sure how he was damaged. His career was already effectively over with no future prospects. He's lucky he's not behind bars.

It seems he'll have to prove his life was about to soar before this op-ed was published and now he's stagnated. How can calling such a man sadistic possibly cause him damages beyond what he brought on himself.

[Archae]

17. His lawyer is none other than Larry Klayman.

The incompetent and terminally stupid Clinton-obsessed activist.

‘Sheriff Joe’ and Larry Klayman Sue The New York Times for $147.5 Million

Larry Klayman, a right-wing activist and attorney, and “Sheriff Joe” Arpaio, a failed Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Arizona, have filed a legal complaint against The New York Times alleging that the paper defamed Arpaio by publishing a column about his loss in which writer Michelle Cottle, a member of the Times’ editorial board, called Arpaio a “sadistic man.” The lawsuit seeks $147.5 million in damages.

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/sheriff-joe-and-larry-klayman-sue-the-new-york-times-for-147-5-million/

[SunSeeker]

18. He should be sanctioned for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

30. Larry Klayman, his attorney, has often been sanctioned for frivolous lawsuits.

A couple of federal judges have actually barred him from appearing in their courtrooms, and he's been suspended in D.C. Unfortunately he seems undeterred.

[mercuryblues]

19. Can a lawyer

please explain this phrase?

defamatory factual assertions

[reACTIONary]

23. I'm not a lawyer . ...

.... but that's an interesting phrase so i searched for an explination. This was helpful:

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/what-defamatory-statement

From this I gather that "factual assertions" means that what was said was stated as if it were a fact, as opposef to, say, a thought or an opinion or a guess.

"From what I've heard, you might think he's a sadist" would not be a factual assertion, while "He is a sadist" would be.

Defamitory means it's a serriously bad acusation , not just a typical sort of insult. Saying he's a bad dude wouldn't be defametory; saying he's a child molester would be if it wasn't true.

[mercuryblues]

24. From the link

In rare cases, a plaintiff can be “libel-proof”, meaning he or she has a reputation so tarnished that it couldn’t be brought any lower, even by the publication of false statements of fact.

According to Arpaio, he can not investigate children being raped, raid minority homes, let people die in his prisons, deny medical care to prisoners, house them in tents in AZ with no A/C, and feed them rotten food. But you can't call him a sadist for doing so.

[riversedge]

20. And your ARE!! a ''Truly Sadistic Man'!!

[NYC Liberal]

21. I thought conservatives always rail against "frivolous lawsuits"

[Nitram]

22. LOL, I thought he was proud about being a sadistic man. Why happened?

[dembotoz]

25. love to be on that jury....paid entertainment with meals included

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

26. It won't get that far.

[Thomas Hurt]

31. He is a self promoting celeb convict, this is going nowhere.

[jmowreader]

33. I would assume...

...the NYT’s lawyers can demand Arpaio be evaluated by competent mental health professionals to determine if the plaintiff is indeed a sadist.

Arpaio’s biggest problem is he’s suing a newspaper that frequently reported on Arpaio’s atrocities.

[Stallion]

34. Probably Should Have Sued ACLU Too

Long before the Trump administration erected a tent city detention camp for migrant children in Texas, Arpaio had his own “Tent City,” a brutal, outdoor holding pen that he once proudly referred to as a “concentration camp.” People who encountered Arpaio’s detention system faced gruesome conditions and humiliating practices, and they were denied basic necessities and health care. For instance, female inmates reported that officers made them sleep in their own menstrual blood and assaulted pregnant women.

For years, the ACLU fought Arpaio’s discriminatory conduct, including his office’s cruel and inhumane treatment of detainees and its practice of illegally detaining people based on their perceived immigration status and discriminating against Latinos in traffic stops. The ACLU won a preliminary injunction and then a trial ruling in its class-action lawsuit to stop Arpaio’s illegal traffic stop policies. A federal judge issued a civil contempt order against Arpaio in 2016 due to his repeated flouting of court orders in the ACLU case. And in a separate criminal proceeding before a different federal judge, Arpaio was convicted in 2017 of criminal contempt as well because his contempt of court was willful and deliberate.


https://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform/arizona-voters-deserve-know-joe-arpaios-true-record-brutality-and-abuse