Originally Posted by : Young Chiefs fan's defamation lawsuit against Deadspin to move forward: 'Crossed the fine line'
A Delaware judge ruled Monday that the Armenta family’s lawsuit against Deadspin for accusing their son of wearing "blackface" at a Chiefs game last year can proceed.
In 2023, Deadspin writer Carron Phillips wrote an article using an image of nine-year-old Holden Armenta sporting black and red Kansas City Chiefs face paint at a game, showing only the black half of his face. Phillips accused Holden of finding a way to "hate Black people and the Native Americans at the same time" and accused his parents of teaching him "hatred."
Holden’s parents Raul Jr. and Shannon later filed a lawsuit in February accusing the sports blog of maliciously attacking Holden by selectively posting only one half of his face and accusing them of racism.
Holden Armenta, 9, attends the Chiefs-Raiders game on Nov. 26 in Las Vegas.
On Monday, Superior Court Judge Sean Lugg denied Deadspin’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, agreeing that the blog posted "provable false assertions" as facts rather than opinion.
"Deadspin published an image of a child displaying his passionate fandom as a backdrop for its critique of the NFL’s diversity efforts and, in its description of the child, crossed the fine line protecting its speech from defamation claims," the judge wrote.
"Having reviewed the complaint, the court concludes that Deadspin’s statements accusing [Holden] of wearing black face and Native headdress ‘to hate black people and the Native American at the same time,’ and that he was taught this hatred by his parents, are provable false assertions of fact and are therefore actionable," Lugg added.
Deadspin posted an image showing only one half of Holden's face at a Chiefs game.
Lugg also refused to dismiss the case based on the assertion that the case should have been filed in the Armenta family’s home state of California rather than Delaware, where Deadspin’s parent company G/O Media resides. G/O Media later sold Deadspin to Lineup Publishing one month after the lawsuit was filed.
A representative from G/O Media declined to comment to Fox News Digital.
Deadspin did not retract the original article. However, an editor’s note was added to address the controversy.
"We regret any suggestion that we were attacking the fan or his family. To that end, our story was updated on Dec. 7 to remove any photos, tweets, links, or otherwise identifying information about the fan. We have also revised the headline to better reflect the substance of the story," the note read.
The headline was also changed from "The NFL needs to speak out against the Kansas City Chiefs fan in Black face, Native headdress" to "The NFL Must Ban Native Headdress And Culturally Insensitive Face Paint in the Stands."
Judge Lugg agreed the original article asserted its accusations of racism as "provable false assertions of fact."
Phillips initially doubled down on his accusations in a since-deleted X post.
"For the idiots in my mentions who are treating this as some harmless act because the other side of his face was painted red, I could make the argument that it makes it even worse. Y'all are the ones who hate [M]exican but wear sombreros on cinco [de Mayo]," Phillips said.
Originally Posted by Mescalito345:
Meanwhile, the lawyers are getting rich due to this ridiculous lawsuit. Aren’t there more important cases to work on?
I actually think it's quite important.
Some dude with a bully pulpit slandered a kid & his family with no forethought or effort to tell the truth & then doubled down due in part it seems b/c he thought there were no consequences & the end relative to social change justifies the means. He was seemingly an easy target to tee off on, not all that different in that vein than the dude Chrissy Teigen bullied on Twitter awhile back.
This isn't about the issue itself but rather the fact that people in positions of power have a duty to tell the truth while promoting whatever his/her worldview is. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mescalito345:
Meanwhile, the lawyers are getting rich due to this ridiculous lawsuit. Aren’t there more important cases to work on?
Originally Posted by Mescalito345:
Meanwhile, the lawyers are getting rich due to this ridiculous lawsuit. Aren’t there more important cases to work on?
This case is a hell of a lot more important than a lot of the bullshit that clogs up the courts on a daily basis.
The blatant dishonesty that has infectious our media could easily be considered one of the most important issues facing the country right now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by warpaint*:
I actually think it's quite important.
Some dude with a bully pulpit slandered a kid & his family with no forethought or effort to tell the truth & then doubled down due in part it seems b/c he thought there were no consequences & the end relative to social change justifies the means. He was seemingly an easy target to tee off on, not all that different in that vein than the dude Chrissy Teigen bullied on Twitter awhile back.
This isn't about the issue itself but rather the fact that people in positions of power have a duty to tell the truth while promoting whatever his/her worldview is.
Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED:
This is the problem with today. You all want to point at the media for not doing their research and realizing the kid was native. Then when someone shows you the research and a direct quote from the father telling you the headdress was bought as a costume and that his culture does not wear the regalia you still double down with the stupidity that it’s part of his heritage. “Pretty sure when it all came out” means you read a random post on social media claming that and just ran with it. You're just as guilty as the MSM in spreading misinformation if you refuse to take the time to actually research it before you speak about it.
The article trying to make this a blackface issue was absolutely wrong. Deadspin should be punished for that. The parents shouldn’t be rewarded for being dumb enough to let their kid wear a headdress to a sporting event, though. The poor kid doesn’t know any better so it obviously sucks for him, but his father obviously should have.
Like I said before. It does not matter if it was bought or made.
Who the fuck cares. Kid is a native American and can dress however he or the parent pleases to celebrate his heritage or just the Chiefs in general. Damn cancel culture won't let kids just be kids and have fun anymore. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Nirvana58:
Like I said before. It does not matter if it was bought or made.
Who the **** cares. Kid is a native American and can dress however he or the parent pleases to celebrate his heritage or just the Chiefs in general. Damn cancel culture won't let kids just be kids and have fun anymore.
I think we’re conflating two issues. The kid was not “celebrating his heritage”. He was rooting for his team. Both are acceptable, but let’s not use the heritage thing to justify it. It’s justifiable on its own. [Reply]
Originally Posted by warpaint*:
I actually think it's quite important.
Some dude with a bully pulpit slandered a kid & his family with no forethought or effort to tell the truth & then doubled down due in part it seems b/c he thought there were no consequences & the end relative to social change justifies the means. He was seemingly an easy target to tee off on, not all that different in that vein than the dude Chrissy Teigen bullied on Twitter awhile back.
This isn't about the issue itself but rather the fact that people in positions of power have a duty to tell the truth while promoting whatever his/her worldview is.
OK, but nobody got injured or died, right? Maybe catching violent criminals is more important? [Reply]
Originally Posted by oldandslow:
I truly am not hyper race sensitive, but accusing the kid of appropriating black culture while wearing a plains Indian war bonnet is pretty ironic.
Just sayin'
I feel like telling a Native American warrior that he wears a bonnet would get you an ass kicking...:-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mescalito345:
OK, but nobody got injured or died, right? Maybe catching violent criminals is more important?
I get what you're saying, but defamation, or libel (to be specific in this instance) is a form of injury just not the kind you're thinking of I am inferring. A little kid like this being lied about on a platform like that can affect his future, social relationships, emotional well-being, standing at school. It can cause the kid's family stress, anxiety, etc. In short it can kind of **** up his life.
The issue in & of itself has nothing to do with catching violent criminals & the resources used for each since it's tried in civil court & the other criminal. The police aren't involved, etc.
This is an aside, but for me personally, in this day & age I wouldn't have let my child wear that costume, not b/c I think it's wrong, but b/c I wouldn't want to put a target on his/her back. There's a mob out there & they don't fight fair & I'd want to protect my kid from being in this situation to begin with. There are hills worth dying on so to speak from a values perspective but this isn't one of them. [Reply]
