No, Mary Jo, I don't think so. He didn't say they were down on the corner peddling their all. The remark was derogatory but I do not think that anyone could show that it was meant as a atatement of fact. It was an insult but it was an opinion.
You might be able to get someplace by calling it hate speech, but I think Rutgers has chosen the better route. Here's that article I mentioned in my last post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/11/AR2007041102518.html check it out: When Essence Carson took the microphone to speak for the Rutgers team, you saw Imus's problem and why it hasn't gone away. In comparison with that blameless face and voice, his slur seemed tangibly, specifically abhorrent, and you felt it all over again. How could any intelligent person conjure such verbiage as "nappy-headed hos" in the first place, much less apply it to such a nice kid? Dana > > Do you think a slander or libel lawsuit would have any standing at > > all? > > Well, most states have specific laws on defamation so it would depend > on the jurisdiction. And yes, he's apologized after the fact, but that > doesn't mean the statements were not slanderous or harmful. You say > the women's reputation has been raised...well someone else said they > were getting threat letters which if that is the case can certainly be > seen as having caused them harm. But I wasn't even saying such a > comment *should* end up in court. Just that there *is* some legal > protection against people saying totally unfounded, offensive > statements. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Deploy Web Applications Quickly across the enterprise with ColdFusion MX7 & Flex 2 Free Trial http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RVJU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:232514 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
