Teachers Accused of Criminal Conduct on J6 Get $120,000 in Damages
“a jury found they were defamed”
Can you imagine what these people have been living through for the last five years?
The College Fix reports:
After 5 years, teachers falsely accused of Jan. 6 ‘insurrection’ get $120,000 in damages
A pair of now-retired Arkansas teachers recently were awarded $120,000 in damages after a jury found they were defamed by a man who accused them of criminal conduct at the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot.
According to the NEA Report (no relation to the National Education Association), via a “sustained campaign” on the internet and initiation of “formal complaints,” defendant Sean Allen had “publicly portray[ed]” Nancy Best and Cindi Talbot as “criminals and extremists” for attending the rally.
In addition to participating in an “insurrection,” Allen accused the former Valley View School District teachers of “trespassing, sedition, participating in a terrorist riot, being part of a coup and a criminal mob,” KATV reports.
He also “contacted state education authorities” to demand the teachers’ termination and revocation of their licenses.
The Jonesboro Sun reported that after a two-month investigation by the Arkansas Professional Licensure Standards Board, it concluded there was “insufficient evidence” that Talbot and Best had “violated any standard of Code of Ethics.”
Plaintiffs’ attorney Robert Steinbuch had noted a different finding could have cost his clients their pensions.
Allen claimed his statements about the teachers were “justified” because he read a Sun article about them, and subsequently “reviewed” their social media activity.
According to a July 2021 story, Allen had written on the Valley View district’s Facebook page (re: Talbot and Best) “Seditious traitors to our country and violent protesters are not suited for educating children. The actions these two teachers took are criminal. Fire these teachers for insurrection of our country.”
Allen’s lawyer argued such statements were protected by the First Amendment; Steinbuch, however, countered that Allen “crossed into defamation by presenting accusations of criminal and extremist conduct as fact.”
“You’re allowed to call people names,” Steinbuch said. “What you’re not allowed to do is accuse the plaintiffs of eight separate acts of criminal or criminal-like behavior […] When you say someone broke into my house, or committed insurrection, you’re making an allegation of fact, and that is required in a defamation case.”
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Whoop-de-do.
Now they each have enough to put a down payment on a pickup truck.
Well, what were their actual damages? Not their potential damages, but their actual ones? The defamer’s words didn’t have their intended effect; after putting them through an unnecessary two-month ordeal the board decided not to fire them, so they didn’t lose any actual income. That limits the defamer’s liability.
Punitive damages are a thing, Milhouse, and for a reason.
What’s your point? Actual damages were $20k per plaintiff. $40k each in punitives. So damages tally to 60k each. Nothing potential about “damages”.
That they may not collect is entirely different. That whatever they collect might not be sufficient to buy a pickup is irrelevant. Even if they. only get a buck, that’s a down payment.
Try to stop being such a pedantic jackass, buddy. You sometimes have smart and useful takes. Far too often though your responses are loaded with “I’m-smarter-than-you” smart-alecky nonsense. Such as this one.
Wondering whether they will actually get a penny of it.
Oh. I see Milhouse has covered this.
not liking this ruling
calling them traitors would seem to me to be his opinion
Leave a Comment