Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

moniss

(7,695 posts)
17. The full Brookings article
Fri Nov 8, 2024, 06:50 AM
Nov 2024

covers that highlighted language and goes into some of the cases. Also remember that there is no precedent for the pardon being used in civil cases. Going into the civil arena opens things up to a President doing things on the level of divorce judgements etc. whereas the the case law considers the word "offences" to mean crimes. There is however criminal defamation and civil defamation with the important distinction of knowledge and intent. Defamation that includes intent to harm and knowledge beforehand of the statements being false is looked at more seriously and is considered a harm to society (against the United States by definition) and can be prosecuted as criminal by a US Attorney, District Attorney etc. The case is US v or State of v etc. and the defamed party might be a witness but is not the plaintiff. The purpose and penalties in the case is for punishment of the defamer and might include fines and jail time. The criminal action is not about paying damages to the defamed party.

The civil case on the other hand is brought by the defamed party as the plaintiff and is for compensation for harm/damages caused to the defamed party. The case of Ruby Freeman and her daughter is civil and one could argue that it could have been criminal but because it wasn't filed that way by a prosecutor it's too late now.

https://www.jsrohilla.com/difference-between-criminal-and-civil-defamation/

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

OOOOHHHHH!!!! A SCOLDING!!!! SoCalDavidS Nov 2024 #1
Yeah... the poor, old bastard. 3Hotdogs Nov 2024 #8
Oh no! A scolding! n/t kirby Nov 2024 #2
The judge should order federal marshals to accompany Rudy to wherever he's got his stuff hidden Vinca Nov 2024 #3
Judges are usually nice to white rich males. Irish_Dem Nov 2024 #11
If this is the kind of enforcement of a judgement he's going to get LiberalLovinLug Nov 2024 #4
This appears to be the plan. Irish_Dem Nov 2024 #12
Judge Liman- You are weak, timid and not doing your job. Rudy is laughing in your face. Resign already. Evolve Dammit Nov 2024 #5
Hey judge, jail him for contempt until you are satisfied with his compliance, or RockRaven Nov 2024 #6
Bailiff, whack his pee-pee! JoseBalow Nov 2024 #7
Scolding are such cruel and unusual punishments. Autumn Nov 2024 #9
He's such a... 2naSalit Nov 2024 #10
So the judge gave him another deadline moniss Nov 2024 #13
For anybody worried about the Orange Ruski giving Ghooliani moniss Nov 2024 #14
Well the SCOTUS pretty much declared BumRushDaShow Nov 2024 #15
The full Brookings article moniss Nov 2024 #17
Oh I know what they are asserting BumRushDaShow Nov 2024 #19
That's why I included the mention of Cash and Carry Clarence. nt moniss Nov 2024 #20
Scolded? Old Crank Nov 2024 #16
The judge will have the choice of criminal contempt moniss Nov 2024 #18
Well, tow it away! What is the problem here? travelingthrulife Nov 2024 #21
"scolds", how about jail time for non-compliance ? republianmushroom Nov 2024 #22
Hey, According to SCOTUS, tonekat Nov 2024 #23
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Judge scolds Giuliani for...»Reply #17