Did OJ sue everyone for defamation?

And sooo much drama.

Was there any big media outlets who said he is a murderer? Most probably not, bc they are not stupid.

It was actually OJ who got sued and he lost all his money to the families.

Can anyone post the entire lawsuit? I can only access page 1 on Twitter.

Postle has the burden of proving that the defendants made the statements he's accusing them of making. He also has to show he suffered damages (was fired, has a bad reputation in the poker world and can't get a game, etc.). He doesn't have to prove the statements are false. If he proves the defendants made the statements and that he suffered damages, then the burden of proof switches to the defendants to demonstrate the statements are true. The standard of proof in a civil case is a preponderance of the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt, nor clear and convincing. That's the lowest standard of proof used in the courts. And in civil cases, the jury verdict doesn't have to be unanimous. California law might vary somewhat.

I don't think Postle can sue those Nevada corporations and individuals living in other states in the California court. The case probably has to be moved to the Federal Court. That's the first attack the defendants will probably make. Also, they can counter-sue for legal expenses. Additionally, any of the defendants who lost money to him in the poker games can counter-sue for the money they lost. Postle probably doesn't want to go to court if he cheated because he could lose. This suit is probably intended as a shot across the bow of those accused, with Postle hoping to back everybody off and get some money in settlements, maybe 5K - 10K from some defendants who will spend more than that in legal expenses if the case moves forward.

OJ was a known public figure and there is a lot of latitude given to those who might offer defamatory opinions because of the protection of the First Amendment. Postle is a private citizen and is afforded more protection from defamation.

No, he still has the burden to prove the statements are false. As a private person, he would not have to prove actual malice by the publishers.


He may be considered a public figure given his appearance on the stream, interviews and documentary:

Some public figures are people who have achieved “pervasive fame or notoriety” in all contexts. Along with these “all-purpose public figures,” the Court explained, there are also “limited-purpose public figures,” people who have voluntarily engaged in a public controversy in an attempt to affect the outcome....”

This might be a hot take but Postle rules.

Oh my....where is the popcorn. I could see ESPN settling for a mid 5 figure sum just to avoid legal fee's/media attention. The others named may dig in....

That said, it is entirely possible Postle's real target is ESPN money here.

Also, for anyone who has a background in law....If this goes to court couldn't the defence call Postle to the stand for questioning? (he could lie on the stand) or have him take a lie detector? (I know they only have about 75% accuracy)

He can plead the fifth and not testify. It doesn’t look good in civil court tho. I don’t think the courts use lie detectors.

Called this one back in June.

And we're all so very very proud of you! Gold star!

Gold star? I want my juice box and snack pack.

Looks like CTO is spreading to other online games. A GM in Chess just got banned for using software at an online tournament.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Bbw7ZNUFt8

How does Postle get a Beverly Hills firm to take his case?


Any possible connection to the "documentary"?

Thanks for linking this. IMO this chess news indirectly relates to a number of ongoing NVG threads at the moment.

I'm only 3 minutes into the video so far. Interesting... at 3:00 mark it's already a foregone conclusion these competitions require having "multiple webcams on a player" in order to adequately safeguard their integrity.

Here's the original story from yesterday. The Armenia Eagles have been stripped of their Pro Chess League 2020 championship and temporarily banned from competition for "fair play violations."

https://www.chess.com/news/view/sain...hess-champions (Oct 1, 2020)

"The Saint Louis Arch Bishops are the winners of the 2020 PRO Chess League championship. The Armenia Eagles have been disqualified from the 2020 season due to fair play violations..."

EDIT: Check out 8:30 mark of the video. Allegedly a player was caught having an iPad Touch "wrapped in toilet paper next to a toilet" at a live event in Dubai five years ago. This shows that poker isn't the only non-branded PvP game facing serious integrity issues due to the real money wagering/gambling (and corresponding niche business interests) involved.

Dominoes is another example that comes to mind. Back before COVID, the UDL got 256 live contestants at its event in Las Vegas. In the second video, the UDL collaborated with UNLV to convert tiles into cards in order to bring the game to the Plaza Hotel in 2018.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yu2njSWCys
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-WmWOmMCDM

Dominoes is another example of a non-branded PvP game that will present a number of unique challenges once a large community (along with marketing interests) become involved in both live and online play.

One of his complaints for damages is that people intentionally inflicted emotional distress on him. How could he ever prove such a thing? How could he prove that people deliberately tried to upset him?

Slander and libel are if both false and damaging allegations are made. There is no doubt they were damaging, but there is no certainty they were false. There is no solid evidence against him, but there is lots of circumstantial evidence of his cheating from the difference between his normal play and his streamed play, and the unbelievably accurate play in the streamed play, that can only be explained by him knowing the opponents cards through cheating.

Gambling establishments and online sites have total choice over who they allow to play, so his complaint about economic disadvantage does not stand up, it is not the defendants responsibility if gambling sites chose not to entertain Postle after the story broke.

He wants a jury trial, and this is indicative of his perverse love of cheating in public and enjoying sadistically damaging people. He is a horrible person.

If he had any sense he would look at the mainstream coverage of his case, which was dumbed down to allow non poker players to understand the case, and realise his case will backfire on him, the jury will see through him, and he is taking on so many influential people in the poker community, while he is just an outcast, with no public supporters prepared to stand up for him, as I cant think of a single person who is saying Postle is innocent.

This tweet by former MPN Managing Director of Poker Alex Scott.

Can someone post a link to the complaint, if it was filed ?

Perhaps one of the myriad of Defendants, if they were served ? (Not looking for clients in this matter , I don't practice in California, I just want to see the entire complaint.)

I tried a search of the Superior Court records for the indicated court. Although I did find a couple of cases involving some Michael Postle parties, this one itt did not pop out.

so this is how liberty dies...with thunderous lawsuits

He absolutely does not have to prove the statements are false. That is absurd. You're basically claiming Postle has to prove a negative. If someone told your boss at work you were a child molester, you wouldn't have to prove you weren't. How would you do that? The accuser would have to prove you were. All Postle would have to prove is that the statements were made and that he suffered a loss because of it (He may have to assert he's not a cheater. But he doesn't have to prove it). If Postle claims that the statements were made maliciously (which probably isn't necessary to win, but could add to the damages), then he would have to prove malice. But that's an additional claim not mentioned in the suit. It possibly could be added later.

Postle's fame, to the degree he has that, came from the allegations against him. Almost nobody knew who he was before the claims against him. Good luck trying to claim he was a public figure. The accusers made him one.

Postle still is not famous or much of a public figure, but he was known in the pokerverse and the negative talk came from the poker community. Known by peers and judged by peers....maybe one of the lawyers in this thread can comment on that.

The real mystery to me is how he is walking without crutches and doesn't need a straw for feedings.

Here is the first definition I located providing the elements of the claim and a cite to the Restatement of Torts. Do you have anything showing the Plaintiff does not have to prove the statements were false?

Elements

In order to establish a prima facie case of defamation, a plaintiff must prove:

a false and defamatory statement by defendant concerning the plaintiff;
an unprivileged publication to a third person;
fault, amounting to at least negligence; and
actual or presumed damages.
Chowdhry v. NLVH, Inc., 109 Nev. 478, 483, 851 P.2d 459 (1993)(citing Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 558 (1977)).

If the defamation tends to injure the plaintiff in his or her business or profession, it is deemed defamation per se, and damages will be presumed.

Chowdhry v. NLVH, Inc., 109 Nev. 478, 483-84, 851 P.2d 459 (1993).

Example Cases

Proof

Whether a statement could be construed as defamatory is a question of law
Whether a statement is capable of a defamatory construction is a question of law. Branda v. Sanford, 97 Nev. 643, 646, 637 P.2d 1223, 1225 (1981). A jury question arises when the statement is susceptible of different meanings, one of which is defamatory. Id.

Chowdhry v. NLVH, Inc., 109 Nev. 478, 483-84, 851 P.2d 459 (1993).

Whether a statement is true/false is a question of fact
Accordingly, a jury must be allowed to determine whether the statement has any “basis in truth,” Wellman, 108 Nev. at 88, 825 P.2d at 211, since the truth or falsity of an allegedly defamatory statement is an issue of fact properly left to the jury for resolution. Nevada Ind. Broadcasting v. Allen, 99 Nev. 404, 413, 664 P.2d 337, 343 (1983).

Posadas v. City of Reno, 109 Nev. 448, 453, 851 P.2d 438, 442 (1993)

Hope the 15 minutes was worth it. Enjoy your defamation lawsuit.