Nicholas Sandmann reaches settlement with NBC

[MichMan]

A settlement has been reached in a lawsuit filed against NBC by Covington Catholic graduate Nick Sandmann.

Sandmann announced the settlement in a tweet, saying the terms of the agreement are confidential. This is Sandmann's third settlement with a major news outlet following media coverage of a viral video featuring him at the Lincoln Memorial in January 2019.

Documents filed Friday in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Kentucky show both parties agreed to dismiss the case without a judgement from the court.

Court records show Sandmann has filed suit in federal court against eight major news outlets including The Washington Post, CNN, NBC, The New York Times, CBS News, ABC News, Rolling Stone and Gannett. In January 2020, CNN settled. In July 2020, The Washington Post settled.



[link:https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/covington-catholic-graduate-nicholas-sandmann-reaches-settlement-in-lawsuit-against-nbc/ar-AARVGYE?ocid=uxbndlbing|

[hlthe2b]

1. This pisses me off on a scale exceeded only by the acquittals of Rittenhouse and Zimmerman.

[kelly1mm]

2. Why so? If you read the history and facts of the incident it is pretty clear that, at minimum,

the news organizations sued portrayed this minor inaccurately. Of all the other injustices in the world THIS is in your top 3?

[hlthe2b]

3. I disagree totally. His mother had legal connections that could whitewash his behavior that day.

And that is all. He won because MSM found it more expedient to settle. But your support for him is noted and I'm sure appreciated.

[kelly1mm]

4. If he won only because the MSM found it more expedient to settle, why does that bother you so much

as to be in your top 3 injustices?

[hlthe2b]

5. Pssst...

You are being too obvious.

[BlackSkimmer]

13. Yeah, it's not even on my list.

News media needs to be more careful.

[kelly1mm]

16. Right. To put Sandman getting some (probably minor) settlement in the same league as Zimmerman

and Rittenhouse seems a bit hyperbolic.

[BlackSkimmer]

18. At the very least.

That kid will get his comeuppance if he keeps smirking like that lol.

The media will hopefully learn from that feeding frenzy.

[11 Bravo]

61. Yup. Punchable faces sometimes get punched.

Backpfeifengesicht is a real thing.

[BlackSkimmer]

63. He certainly has a punchable face.

I gotta agree with ya there!

[Dr. Strange]

15. What behavior of his do you think needed whitewashing?

[BlackSkimmer]

20. Good question.

I await the answer.

[hlthe2b]

21. We get it. You are big fans.

Here's his GOFUNDME page. Have at it. I'm sure his settlement was not adequate to the horrendous pain you profess he experienced.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/standwithcovington

[BlackSkimmer]

23. Wow, seriously?

I couldn’t care less about the little weasel.

Sorry his newfound wealth is causing you such misery. Cheer up! It’s the holidays!

Do tell us what was whitewashed?

[dumbcat]

24. Can't answer the question?

Or won't?

I am not a big fan, and I would also like to hear your answer to the question posed. Do you have one?

[hlthe2b]

25. Do your own research from sites other than the far RW. I'm not your peon.

Or donate to his GOFUNDME site since you seem to believe he's been horribly treated.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/standwithcovington

He will undoubtedly appreciate your support. I, however, am not subject to your demands.

[dumbcat]

28. Gotcha!

I totally understand. I'm sure we all do now.

Have a great day!

[BlackSkimmer]

32. Yes indeed.

Just as I figured.

[BlackSkimmer]

33. Wow, I didn't even know he had a gofundme.

I also don’t know what the right wing says about him since I’m not in the habit of reading their drivel.

You seem to know a lot about him.

[hlthe2b]

36. As do nearly all those here when it happened.

[BlackSkimmer]

37. Uh huh.

Somehow most of us missed what needed to be whitewashed.

[msfiddlestix]

51. Is this the punk who literally got in the face of a Native American Chief in DC during TFG term?

I feel like I saw images of him spitting in the Native American Chief's face. I don't remember names or Tribe.

Or is this an entirely different punk?

[hlthe2b]

53. Yup... That's him. The Native American activist as much as said Sandman's PR firm wrote his later

statements and wasn't buying the "innocence" promoted by his wealthy and RW influential lawyer Mother. But, for some here, Native Americans don't count and they prefer to defend this Trump-loving cretin and the MAGATs supporting him. I believe Nathan Phillips, myself and my own eyes and ears.

Here, as a reminder:

https://www.insider.com/nathan-phillips-pr-firm-nick-sandmann-response-viral-encounter-2019-1

[LiberatedUSA]

64. I just watched your video.

He is literally just standing there with everyone else and is walked up to.

So guilty means if you are standing there and a member of a minority group walks up to you face to face, you are the asshole if you just stand there?

Your video proves the point. The dislike is because he had the audacity to stand and smirk instead of backing down when the Native American WALKED UP TO HIM.

And as another poster pointed out, he wasn’t even remotely the most offensive person there. You just don’t like his smirk. Admit it. Which you already have, since you equate what I have seen it that video with what Zimmerman and Rittenhouse did.


Oh well. Canceling people and getting them fired only works on people who have to work for a living. Those who make their income from a portfolio do not answer to a boss. Looks like Sandmann will be joining the ranks of “go ahead and film me, you have no power because I don’t have a boss to answer to” crowd.

[hlthe2b]

68. ...

Breitbart and other RW media/communities will certainly line up to agree with you. Your disdain for the rights of that elderly Native American activist cinches it. I note that you didn't even bother to read his comments on what transpired. So NOT subtle, "friend."

Welcome to my ignore list. I can't respect those so disdainful of the rights of others and intent on defending MAGATs. That's why I'm here and not on RW media. Enjoy your time here, but NOT MINE. Bye Bye now.

[msfiddlestix]

72. Thank you I couldn't remember names...

wasn't sure if this was the scene I was thinking of.

But you just confirmed it.. I haven't read into all the details, nor followed the legal situation, except what I saw on my tv or computer at the time this happened. I was absolutely abhorred, stunned at the crassness, the disgusting, puke inducing, outrageous specter of it at the time The cruelty, the inhumanity... I could go on. I was outraged at TFG's response, and others.

I don't get the brush off from others... it's just doesn't make sense to me.

[musette_sf]

56. "the news organizations sued portrayed this minor inaccurately"

Um, no. Vicious little hater went to a hate event sponsored by enemies of the Constitution and the rights of innocent citizens, attended a hate parade dedicated to hate of innocent women and their rights, and got caught red-hatted doing more hate on the side while at said hate event. Vicious little hater will hopefully, someday, get the karma to which he is so richly entitled.

[gldstwmn]

69. So you're co signing his behavior toward the Native Americans?

That tells me everything I need to know.

[hlthe2b]

71. Yup... A half dozen here are intent on discounting Native American actist elder to defend the MAGAT.

Some seem very confused as to where they are it appears.

[gldstwmn]

76. DU needs a road map these days.

It can be discouraging but I always tell myself how are you going to recognize it if you don't see it for yourself?
Having been Catholic school educated my parents would have flipped if the priests or nuns brought us to a political rally as part of a school trip.
We live in interesting times.

[yardwork]

78. Good question to ask Sandmann, actually.

I would have respected him if he'd accepted apologies. But he went for millions and frankly, as right-wingers like to say, "he's no angel."

[LiberatedUSA]

8. I know.

Rittenhouse and Zimmerman killed someone, but this little bastard? Why he just stood there doing nothing at all but had a smirk on his face. And let me tell you, that smirk warrants wishing him bad luck for the rest of his life because that smirk annoys us.

[hlthe2b]

11. So, they say on RW media. Very helpful of you to espouse it here.

[BlackSkimmer]

14. So any of us who disagree with your rage are right wingers?

Wow.

[hlthe2b]

17. When the espoused "facts" of the case are identical to that posted on RW media, I will point that

out. I'm sure it is just coincidental. Others, however, might understandably wonder about the intense defense of this little Trump monster, though.

[BlackSkimmer]

19. Oh my. We'uns best watch our opinions I reckon.

[dumbcat]

26. So, what are the real "facts" that we missed

on the RW media that we were misled about?

[hlthe2b]

27. Do your own damned research. DUers are not at your beck and call, especially in support of

RW media darlings. Enjoy!

[dumbcat]

29. Ah, I think now we see the truth

Thank you.

[hlthe2b]

30. Somehow, I doubt anything posted by me or anyone else on DU would suffice.

We get it. You are a BIG supporter. Congrats to you.

[Dr. Strange]

31. Are the "facts" in dispute?

I haven't seen different sets of "facts" regarding this issue. How does your recollection of this event differ from everyone else's? Or does it?

Others, however, might understandably wonder about the intense defense of this little Trump monster, though.

What's to defend? He's a Trumper. I'm not sure how his behavior rates anywhere near the vicinity of George Zimmerman. I mean, Sandmann's behavior wasn't even the worst behavior at that protest. He wasn't calling Native Americans "Uncle Tomahawk". He wasn't hurling homophobic slurs. He wasn't making claims of "it's not rape if she enjoys it". Why is his smirking more offensive than all of that?

Or is there something else that he did that you're not telling us?

[BlackSkimmer]

35. Another good question.

But…crickets.

[LiberatedUSA]

40. I know.

That is why when the republicans say the sky is blue, I say “nope! If you said it, it is a lie.” They then tell me breathing air is bad, so I start holding my breath so I don’t agree with them.

[dumbcat]

12. It wasn't just the smirk ....

It's that it was a righty-looking smirk!

We hates righty-looking smirks.

[SunImp]

42. Same

[hlthe2b]

44. Doncha love all the "DUers" on this thread defending him?

[SunImp]

50. It's sickening

[UnderThisLaw]

80. Also, it's always the same names

I guess when there are no consequences transparency ceases as a concern

[Initech]

47. Agreed! Fuck these morons!

[beaglelover]

6. Heard he got $275 million.

[Celerity]

9. If true, that is INSANE

[Tommy Carcetti]

10. Yeah, I'm going out on a limb and say that's not true.

He's lucky if he got 1/10,000 of that, before attorney's fees and taxes.

[ForgedCrank]

39. If I remember correctly,

that was his damage claim amount. If they settled, he certainly got less than that. I'd guess somewhere in the middle.

[ProfessorGAC]

62. Nowhere Near The Middle

Having worked in & with large companies, they don't "settle" for 9 figures.
They'd go down swinging in court & appeals before they said "Ok, here's $135 million to go away."
I bet these settlements are in the neighborhood of 0.5-1% of claims.
I was even involved in a $150 million restraint of trade lawsuit as an expert witness.
After I was done with cross examination (I was the 2nd witness for the defense), the plaintiff went to the defense counsel and offered to drop the case if the defendant paid the $6 million in royalties they owed the plaintiff (but held in abeyance pending the outcome of the case) plus, a promise to not countersue for court costs.
They really got nothing out of it.
The settlement wasn't for half of the 150, or a third or even a tenth.
It was essentially money owed plus a promise.
I just don't see any general counsel signing off on a settlement for 0.3% of total revenues.

[ForgedCrank]

73. Sure they would,

if they knew they were likely going to lose. And in this case, they were almost certainly going to lose. The stepped over the line and promoted an image of Sandman that was based on false information, and it did do damage.
I'm not going to allow anyone to accuse me of being supportive of that little MAGA punk, but he had a very solid case and argument.

[ProfessorGAC]

79. Not Seeing It

My experience shows me otherwise.
And, I doubt a jury would find the damages realistic even if he had a good case.
I'm guessing most judges would steer the jury away from the preposterous number being asked.
I'm sticking with what I've actually experienced several times.

[ForgedCrank]

83. Wherever you've had

experience, judges steer the jury?

[SunImp]

45. Wtf

[bullwinkle428]

46. Trump literally settled the "Trump U." case for 1/10th of that figure, and

there were a ton of people looking to get something out of that suit, not just one person. So I'll call bullshit on that number.

[onenote]

48. Heard where. What's your source?

Otherwise it's reasonable to suspect you are spouting nonsense.

[Tommy Carcetti]

60. He probably demanded it.

And he could have also demanded his own Gulfstream jet and a date with Kate Upton, but I'm pretty sure he didn't end up with any of that.

You can demand anything in a court of law.

Hell, check out any number of My Pillow Guy's suits, who seeks to declare Donald Trump president.

[inthewind21]

52. The suite was 275 mil

They settled. I doubt he got the amount he was suing for in a "settlement"

[Solomon]

67. And i heard they settled for nuisance value.

His lawyers got the money. They didn't do ut for free you know.

[Tommy Carcetti]

7. Nuisance value settlement, most likely.

NBC didn't want to bother with the time and legal expense to defend against the suit, regardless of the merits, so they likely tossed a few thousand in Sandmann's way under the cover of a confidential settlement.

Because the amount isn't revealed Sandmann gets to posture and claim that he took NBC to the bank, when in all likelihood--after his lawyers get their cut--he probably ends up with what might buy him a gently used Honda Accord, at best.

It happens all the time in the business.

[Nevilledog]

22. +10000

[onenote]

49. Might well have settled for payment of his legal fees.

Wouldn't surprise me.

[UTUSN]

34. Next step, he & RITTENHOUSE to announce for co-DearLeaders

[SunImp]

41. Little Bastard getting rich for being an asshole

[smirkymonkey]

43. Arghhh!

[inthewind21]

54. It's not just him

There are 12 from that school that ALL filed suites against everyone they could. They are like the Westboro Baptist church. Wouldn't surprise me to find out that was the plan all along. Several of the suits got dismissed. WBBC MO, go "protest" something (in most of their cases, a military funeral) be as big an asshole as you can in order to provoke a response. When you get said response, sue.

[Sympthsical]

55. So people aren't mad they were lied to

They're mad at the person who was lied about, because they don't like his politics.

This seems perfectly balanced and healthy.

[wellst0nev0ter]

57. No, the media reported on a developing story

Phillips presented his side of the story, which was later shown not to stand up to evidence, and they reported Sandmann's side too.

Sandmann should be happy that the record was corrected and shove off.

[Sympthsical]

65. Or they could just wait

It's not like it was a story of national import. It wasn't breaking news we all needed to hear about.

Maybe getting fuller information would've worked.

Or maybe the narrative was too good. I'm betting on this one.

[wellst0nev0ter]

70. There was no waiting for this story

They had the facts they had at the time and reported it. Other facts come out later. That's how it works.

[Sympthsical]

81. When someone shows me an edited clip, I look for more

I want to know I have the whole story before sharing or forming an opinion.

And I'm not even a major national media organization.

[Dr. Strange]

74. I mean...

Sandmann should be happy that the record was corrected and shove off.

you say that, but there are people in this very thread who still buy the original story, and think that the correction is part of the right wing's defense of Sandmann. And they are convinced that those of us who recognize this correction must in fact be supporting Sandmann.

[wellst0nev0ter]

75. He's still smirked like the little creep he is

That part will never change.

The only thing that changed is that we now know that Phillips intervened in a confrontation.

[hlthe2b]

58. Most of us are, given it was N. American activist, Nathan Philips who was LIED ABOUT.

I understand those supporting Sandman can donate to his GOFUNDME. For your convenience, I posted it upstream. I only hope my funds hold out to counter your donations which I continue to make to ACTUAL DEMOCRATIC causes.

You see, I don't support Trump MAGATs who try to drown out the rights of others--especially elderly Native Americans who had a valid permit to be there.


Here, as a reminder (but per the RW, we should not believe our "lying eyes" and we certainly should not believe the word of an elderly Native American Activist) :

https://www.insider.com/nathan-phillips-pr-firm-nick-sandmann-response-viral-encounter-2019-1

[Sympthsical]

66. I'll . . . just be over here

Waving down from the edge of that cliff.

[Progressive Jones]

59. Another RW parasite. nt