Check out some similar questions!

TysonGrl · Jul 22, 2012, 06:42 PM

Long story short Im told that some one is suing me for slander. All I said was that I didn't put anything past this man or the family when it comes to doing sick and twisted sh$t to a child because he's been accused of it before. I never said he was convicted but I said it's probably because there's not enough proof. Can he sue me? And he doesn't work he collects disability so would me saying this have to hurt him financially in order for him to sue?

Fr_Chuck · Jul 22, 2012, 06:45 PM

If you really said that, yes of course, you accused him of "things with a child" of course he can sue you. And not that it would cost him much, most likely find an attorney to do it for a percentage, so it most likely will not cost him anything.

But just have to wait and see if you get served

TysonGrl · Jul 22, 2012, 06:51 PM

I didn't say he did do any thing. Just basically that he's creepy and if he did do something that it wouldn't surprise me.

Alty · Jul 22, 2012, 06:53 PM

Chuck, I think the OP is referring to loss of income when she stated that her statements didn't cost him anything. She's going by the pretense that someone can only sue for slander if the lies told affect them financially.

Alty · Jul 22, 2012, 06:55 PM

Originally Posted by TysonGrl

I didnt say he did do any thing. Just basicly that hes creepy and if he did do some thing that it wouldnt surprise me.

Actually, based on your original post, you said a lot more than that;

"I didnt put anything past this man or the family when it comes to doing sick and twisted sh$t to a child because hes been accused of it before. I never said he was convicted but I said it's probably because theres not enough proof. "

You accused him of being a child molester. Now, if he is, then your comment isn't slanderous. But, if he's never been convicted, then your comment is very slanderous, and yes, he can sue. Will he win? Don't know. That's up to the courts.

TysonGrl · Jul 22, 2012, 07:00 PM

Maybe I should be more detailed. He had charges against him many yrs ago. His own daughter roughly explain to me his granddaughters where taking out of the home that some one was molesting them but he and the girls father were suspects but they couldn't say who did it. Then his daughter also filed charges that he did the same to her but when they went to court it was some what dropped because of a time lapse and not enough proof.. This is from what I hear.. There's more to it but ill be here all night if I type it all out. Questions were raised about another child in the family and that's when I said it wouldn't surprise me.

TysonGrl · Jul 22, 2012, 07:05 PM

I get what your saying. I didn't exactly say it in either term. Let me check really quick and I will get the exact wording.

Alty · Jul 22, 2012, 07:17 PM

Here's the problem, and sorry, but I seem to have lost all my quoting options, so I'll have to do this old school. In fact, I can't even change the colors or anything in order to clearly show what I'm quoting, and what I'm writing. :(

"He had charges agaisnt him many yrs ago. "

Yes, but there is a premise of innocent until proven guilty. He wasn't convicted, therefore he's presumed to be innocent of those charges.

"Then his daughter also filed charges that he did the same to her but when they went to court it was some what dropped because of a time lapse and not enough proof."

Again, he wasn't convicted.

"This is from what I hear."

Hearsay. Just because you heard it, doesn't mean it's true. I heard that Elvis is still alive, his death was faked. See what I mean? Unless you have proof that this man is a child molester, going around stating that he is, isn't okay. It is slandering his reputation, especially since he went to court, and he was cleared of those charges.

He may well be what you say, but you can't prove it. You have hearsay, you have charges for which he was exonerated. You're accusing a man that has been found innocent. That is slanderous.

I'm sorry, I wish I could back you up on this, but really, I can't. He has the right to sue. Heck, anyone can sue. Again, will he win, well, it's likely. You did make slanderous comments. I hope it doesn't get that far, and please, don't say anything further about him, or your suspicions. Talk to a lawyer.

I'm not one, nor am I a legal expert, but this is pretty much a no brainer. Keep your thoughts to yourself, and get professional help.

I wish you the best of luck.

TysonGrl · Jul 22, 2012, 07:21 PM

I put I didn't understanf if he wasn't in trouble for such things then why is it that none of the children (tjere are more than the ones I have spoke about) aloud in the home. This was an argument between I and his family member. The person went on to say things about my family and I said no one in my family has been accused of these types of things at least. I just basically want to know where I stand if what I said was wrong then I will deal with it. Thank you for your info.

Fr_Chuck · Jul 22, 2012, 07:26 PM

If you had only said, his daughter told you this, but you said that you would not trust him and that he did ( child molest) So yes I see a good law suit, that is why I said he most likely can get a lawyer to do it for percentage.

TysonGrl · Jul 22, 2012, 07:26 PM

Im still waiting to see if he even will. I didn't think putting it in them terms meant I was accusing him it was just my opinion that he comea off as a creep and with prior accusations

TysonGrl · Jul 22, 2012, 07:28 PM

Im still waiting to see if he even will. I didn't think putting it in them terms meant I was accusing him it was just my opinion that he comea off as a creep and with prior accusations that it throws a red flag for me. Thank you for the info though I will keep that in mind. One person said because ita he said she said that there iant any hard prorf and then another said in order for him to sue me that he would have to proof damages financially that's why I asked.

TysonGrl · Jul 22, 2012, 07:37 PM

They know where I heard it from because I did tell them. Its long and drugged out and don't want to have to repeat word for word. But I will take the advice and call a lawyer. They also said crazy bad things against me so I have a feeling it will be both of us introuble or nothing. Now I know why people say if you have nothing nice to say don't say any thing at all.. lol.. Thanks! :)

Alty · Jul 22, 2012, 08:26 PM

Tysongrl, I highly recommend that you seek the advice of a lawyer, and I highly recommend that you stop telling this story to anyone else. No more explaining what was said, what you said, what he said, what you think he did, none of it. You're only making matters worse. Just stop talking about the incident until your lawyer says it's okay.

If he's suing then continuing to slander him by repeating what you said, isn't a good idea. The courts won't care why you said it, only that you can prove that you're right, and sadly even you yourself have stated that it was your opinion, not something based on fact, just hearsay and presumption. That's why this is a problem, and that's also why you really need to stop repeating it. Okay?

Good luck.

excon · Jul 22, 2012, 09:01 PM

Originally Posted by TysonGrl

Im still waiting to see if he even will.

Hello T:

Ain't no way a man with NO money is going to sue anybody..

excon

Alty · Jul 22, 2012, 09:04 PM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello T:

Ain't no way a man with NO money is gonna sue anybody..

excon

I hate to disagree Exy. Many lawyers, at least where I live, will take on a case if they think they'll win, and then take a percentage.

When I had my car accident I hired a lawyer. He took the case, charged nothing upfront, and when we won, he took 40%.

If a lawyer believes this man has a case, it's very likely they'll take the case and charge only if he wins.

ScottGem · Jul 23, 2012, 03:43 AM

Bottom line here is you keep your mouth shut and wait until you are served. If and when you get a summons, then you get a lawyer.

What you have told us you said is actionable but it is iffy. You expressed an opinion based on facts you were aware of. What a judge or jury will rule could go either way.

AK lawyer · Jul 23, 2012, 05:19 AM

Originally Posted by Alty

... You're accusing a man that has been found innocent. That is slanderous. ...

Not necessarily. Just because he was found not guilty, doesn' t mean he didn't do it. In a criminal trial, a defendant is not determined to be innocent; rather a not guilty verdict means that the defendant wasn't proven to be guilty. There is a big difference. So, if OP is able to prove in court, by a preponderence of evidence, that he actually did do it, OP would prevail.

The allegations seems to be, if untrue, slander per se. Thus proof of actual monetary loss is not necessary.

TysonGrl · Jul 23, 2012, 02:55 PM

Ok thanks every one for the info...

TysonGrl · Jul 23, 2012, 03:02 PM

I believe my ex has been claiming our child with out my consent... I have primary residence and primary physical custody.. The child does not live with him in any way.. Would this be considered fraud? I don't work so I'm a stay at home mom... The child is with me 24/7 not him... If it is fraud how do I go about putting an end to this??