REPORTING AN ALLEGED CRIME IS LIBELOUS SLANDER AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL

Author: 3RU7AL
Ethics
Philosophy
logiczombie
intp
Anarchy

Posts

Total: 93
Topic's author
#1
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
Your public reputation is your most valuable asset.

So there should be laws that keep people from saying mean things about each other in public.

Especially famous people.

Nobody should be able to use a photograph of you or talk about you ("use your name or your corporation's name as click-bait") WITHOUT YOUR EXPRESS CONSENT.

Celebrities and other public figures are constantly being accused of "not caring" about things like "the environment" and or "justice" and the like.

These kinds of claims are LIBELOUS SLANDER AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL.

Caring about the "right" or "wrong" things is not a crime yet.

And since it is an indisputable fact that people don't know the inner thoughts (actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea) of the people they hate, they should not be allowed to speak publicly on the matter without facing steep fines and penalties.
#2
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Question: IF somebody like; let's use Dwayne Johnson, just as an example; allegedly stole from a store. The video was leaked to the internet somehow and we know pretty reliably that Dwayne stole, would it be illegal to say: "Dwayne Johnson is a thief,"?
Topic's author
#3
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
Your public reputation is your most valuable asset.

So there should be laws that keep people from saying mean things about each other in public.

Especially famous people.

Nobody should be able to use a photograph of you or talk about you ("use your name or your corporation's name as click-bait") WITHOUT YOUR EXPRESS CONSENT.

Celebrities and other public figures are constantly being accused of "not caring" about things like "the environment" and or "justice" and the like.

Celebrities and other public figures are constantly being accused of totally false "crimes" that are just made up by people who are obviously jealous of them, I mean if you were super rich and famous would you ever commit any crimes? 

Of course not!!


These kinds of claims are LIBELOUS SLANDER AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL.

Caring about the "right" or "wrong" things is not a crime yet.

And since it is an indisputable fact that people don't know the inner thoughts (actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea) of the people they hate, they should not be allowed to speak publicly on the matter without facing steep fines and penalties.

I mean, how can we ever have truly "free-speech" if these idiots are allowed to just say whatever the heck they want??
Topic's author
#4
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
Question: IF somebody like; let's use Dwayne Johnson, just as an example; allegedly stole from a store. The video was leaked to the internet somehow and we know pretty reliably that Dwayne stole, would it be illegal to say: "Dwayne Johnson is a thief,"?
HAVE YOU PERSONALLY AUTHENTICATED THE OBVIOUSLY FAKE VIDEO?

You should always report alleged crimes to the police and only to the police.

You should never make public accusations.

And anonymous crime reports are no longer accepted, so be prepared to fill out some forms and face the person you're accusing, because they're required by law to know your name and home address.
#5
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Yay satire, anyway, the entire point was to poke a hole there - that is a reasonable accusation to make - that isn't libel. Let's get the dictionary definition shall we?

Libel - "a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation."
Slander - "The action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation."

Both of these suppose that the crime has not been committed; therefore you are assuming that to be the case - but the preponderance of evidence would point to the other side. Also, illegal actions such as libel or slander, require INTENT, if you are trying to argue against Donald Trump being criticized, don't because again - a preponderance of the evidence.

Topic's author
#6
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
Libel - "a published false statement [not necessarily an accusation of crime] that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation."
Would it be illegal to say: "Dwayne Johnson is a thief," - - the answer is "YES".

(IFF) Dwayne Johnson was not already legally convicted of the crime you accused them of (THEN) you could very easily be dragged into court and forced to prove the legitimacy of the "evidence" (costing you thousands, if not millions of dollars in court fees regardless of whether or not you "win").

Slander - "The action or crime of making a false spoken statement [not necessarily an accusation of crime] damaging to a person's reputation."
Would it be illegal to say: "Dwayne Johnson is a thief," - - the answer is "YES".

(IFF) Dwayne Johnson was not already legally convicted of the crime you accused them of (THEN) you could very easily be dragged into court and forced to prove the legitimacy of the "evidence" (costing you thousands, if not millions of dollars in court fees regardless of whether or not you "win").

Now imagine trying to prove a claim like, "George W. Bush doesn't care about black people".

Do you personally believe you could prove this statement is true in a court of law?
Topic's author
#7
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
Also, illegal actions such as libel or slander, require INTENT, if you are trying to argue against Donald Trump being criticized, don't because again - a preponderance of the evidence.
Please explain.
#8
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
False. IN every regard. In the court of law, the responsibility of the burden of proof falls onto the person bringing it to court. The entire point of the example would be to point out that there is evidence of such a claim - it would be unreasonable to say that this person has to prove that this is true being brought to the court of law, what makes more sense and is the case, is that the person claiming the thing to be untrue has to demonstrate that it is untrue before the case even be tried. This is the standard all cases have to reach before they are brought into court. Furthermore, there has to be a demonstration of INTENT to harm their reputation, not merely saying a false thing. Even FURTHER MORE,  it has to be a factual matter not an opinion. Therefore if were to say, "Factually speaking, Dwayne Johnson robbed a store" would be different from saying, "Dwayne is a thief" Because I could be referring to different things.
#9
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
I did.... you have to INTEND to bring down his reputation in order to be charged for Libel or Slander... do you not know how it works? 

And more, privacy... isn't the most important thing... what would be more important is to warn people who are supporting that person that it is plausible that that person has done a bad thing... because you usually shouldn't support people who do bad things. I suppose you could make pragmatic arguments against it, but they wouldn't be consistent.
Topic's author
#10
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
 In the court of law, the responsibility of the burden of proof falls onto the person bringing it to court.
Are you suggesting that Dwayne Johnson must PROVE THEIR OWN INNOCENCE before a judge will allow their libel case against you to go to trial?
Topic's author
#11
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
The entire point of the example would be to point out that there is evidence of such a claim
EVIDENCE =/= PROOF
Topic's author
#12
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
the person claiming the thing to be untrue has to demonstrate that it is untrue before the case even be tried.
Are you familiar with the concept of SLAPP Suits
Topic's author
#13
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
I did.... you have to INTEND to bring down his reputation in order to be charged for Libel or Slander... do you not know how it works? 
How exactly does someone PROVE they did NOT intend to "bring down his reputation"?

actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea
Topic's author
#14
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
And more, privacy... isn't the most important thing... what would be more important is to warn people who are supporting that person that it is plausible that that person has done a bad thing... because you usually shouldn't support people who do bad things. I suppose you could make pragmatic arguments against it, but they wouldn't be consistent.
Specifically dissuading supporters is a very direct demonstration of "intent to bring down their reputation".

And more, privacy... IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING.

because you usually shouldn't support people who do bad things.
you're kidding me, right?

have you ever purchased a product that happened to be stamped, "made in china"?
#15
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
No, I'm saying that IF Dwayne Johnson wanted to claim somebody was guilty of a crime, he would have to prove that, It simply happens that it includes his alleged innocence in that case. Unless you're saying that I would have to prove my innocence before a judge?
#16
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Evidence doesn't equal proof is irrelevant, it is justifiable to believe such a thing, moving on
#17
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Nope, and I don't care to investigate, explain why this is relevant

#18
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Do you not know what deduction is? How do you prove somebody had malice of forethought, its the same concept, you seem awfully unfamiliar with case law to be discussing with this much confidence
#19
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
I want arguments not examples - explain the relevance of each claim - furthermore - demonstrate the claim that "Pricay is the most important". Most as in, more important than anything else. And are you claiming that EVERY aspect of china is bad? I wouldn't take you for a generalized. I don't accept the claim, support it this time.
Topic's author
#20
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
I'm suggesting that Dwayne Johnson could probably hire a raft of private investigators to dig up any unsavory information about you personally and or about your family and or about your friends.

You are very likely to end up in court, one way or another, if you attempt to punch above your weight-class.
Topic's author
#21
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
Do you not know what deduction is? How do you prove somebody had malice of forethought, its the same concept, you seem awfully unfamiliar with case law to be discussing with this much confidence
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO READ PEOPLE'S MINDS.

DOUBLY SO RETROACTIVELY.
#22
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
IF somebody does a crime, AND that crime is easily proven, THEN you should report it and talk about it - IF that thing is proven untrue, then take back that claim, and then you have a responsibility to discredit the previous notion, but that is IF AND ONLY IF, that claim has been proven untrue.


#23
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Again, I ask, do you know what malice of forethought it, it is very possible what is likely the case in the majority of instances. Also... yes, you can read minds, by establishing what a specific brain wave equates to in terms of thoughts, you can make a fairly accurate "mind reader" not really relevant but just wanted to be pedantic since you enjoy it so much.
Topic's author
#24
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
demonstrate the claim that "Pricay is the most important".
WITHOUT PRIVACY YOU HAVE NO AUTONOMY.

Topic's author
#25
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
And are you claiming that EVERY aspect of china is GOOD? I wouldn't take you for a generalized.
#26
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Incorrect. Regardless if people know of my secrets I am still free to choose what I want to do with those things. Just because you have the financial reports of somebody's taxes, that does not mean you have control of their finances. This is a very large non-sequitur. 
#27
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Seriously? I expect this from Tarik, not you. I claimed that you shouldn't support something which is bad, and then you said, "Ever bought anything from China?" I am not claiming anything about the overarching good or bad about China, I am simply pointing out that you are generalizing china's ethics, and asking you to demonstrate the claim, stop your tu quoques.
Topic's author
#28
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
IF somebody does a crime, AND that crime is easily proven, THEN you should report it and talk about it
I agree.  You should very discreetly report it to the police and only to the police.

- IF that thing is proven untrue, then take back that claim, and then you have a responsibility to discredit the previous notion, but that is IF AND ONLY IF, that claim has been proven untrue.
Are you perhaps familiar with the concept of THE LIAR'S DIVIDEND?
#29
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Neither of these addresses my points, my first point said, "TALK ABOUT IT" as in, you should spread the FACT that this person had done something against the law, regardless of if the action was right or wrong.  Explain what the "Liar's Dividend" is, and why it is relevant.
Topic's author
#30
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
Regardless if people know of my secrets I am still free to choose what I want to do with those things.
Why don't we make everyone's vote public?

Just making everyone's votes public wouldn't change anyone's votes would it?