Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Roy Moore is suing Sacha Baron Cohen

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by channingcrowderhungry, Sep 5, 2018.

  1. channingcrowderhungry

    channingcrowderhungry Premium Member

    5,650
    945
    563
    Apr 3, 2007
    Bottom of a pint glass
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. WarDamnGator

    WarDamnGator GC Hall of Fame

    6,818
    439
    438
    Apr 8, 2007
    I haven't seen this series, but in the past, Cohen just asks dumb questions and acts like a fool until his "interviewee" comes down to his level ... but he certainly doesn't force anyone to embarrass themselves. Some don't fall for it, but the ones that do, .... they seem to all be willing participants.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. channingcrowderhungry

    channingcrowderhungry Premium Member

    5,650
    945
    563
    Apr 3, 2007
    Bottom of a pint glass
    In this one Cohen "made" a pedophile detector and it kept going off near Moore. It was pretty funny. But Moore says he was told he was being interviewed for a pro-Israel piece and to be awarded a prize of some sort.
     
  4. tilly

    tilly Superhero Moderator with bulletproof posts! Moderator VIP Member

    I have to admit. It seems that misleading someone into an embarrassing interview should have legal bounds.
    Not defending Moore the person, just the ramifications of these things if a good person gets harmed.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. tilly

    tilly Superhero Moderator with bulletproof posts! Moderator VIP Member

    Of a misleading baited premise. I think that is where the legal issue may be.
     
  6. wgbgator

    wgbgator Very Stable Genius Premium Member

    Apr 19, 2007
    Geo-hell
    I cant imagine any SBC interview 'get' is based on the straightforward pitch "hey I'm a popular comedy guy and I want to embarrass you badly on TV."
     
  7. mutz87

    mutz87 Ain't me VIP Member

    36,268
    2,718
    1,786
    Aug 30, 2014
    It depends on the particulars of the case, but this was more or less my reaction too. I don't see it as you defending Moore, but reacting to what seems a wrong, or at least enough of a wrong that might very well see Moore succeed in court.
     
  8. channingcrowderhungry

    channingcrowderhungry Premium Member

    5,650
    945
    563
    Apr 3, 2007
    Bottom of a pint glass
    You guys hit it on the head why I'm curious to see how this plays out. Few are going to defend Moore. Cohen was in disguise and lured him under false pretense. I think it's going to be interesting to see who signed what contract and how it plays out.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    8,962
    1,768
    568
    Oct 30, 2017
    Yeah, I don't think it should. Why should the law reward you for your own stupidity?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. wgbgator

    wgbgator Very Stable Genius Premium Member

    Apr 19, 2007
    Geo-hell
    They'll have to shutdown Project Veritas. No more pimp costumes.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    8,962
    1,768
    568
    Oct 30, 2017
    Let's put it this way, what's the difference between what SBC did and what SNL does? Other than him doing it to Moore's face . . . .
     
  12. mutz87

    mutz87 Ain't me VIP Member

    36,268
    2,718
    1,786
    Aug 30, 2014
    FWIW, James O'Keefe was sued by an ACORN employee for 100k and lost. He's also currently being sued for a million for similar deceptions.
     
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2018
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. mutz87

    mutz87 Ain't me VIP Member

    36,268
    2,718
    1,786
    Aug 30, 2014
    Perhaps defining what is civilly wrong and deserving of a reward is along the lines of late Justice Potter Stewart trying to define hard core pornography? :)
     
    • Wish I would have said that Wish I would have said that x 1
  14. fastsix

    fastsix Premium Member

    10,458
    1,144
    833
    Apr 11, 2007
    Seattle
    I look at it as if Cohen was a reporter going undercover to get a story.

    If he's found guilty of something, it reminds me of this very bad law.

    The Ag Gag Laws: Hiding Factory Farm Abuses From Public Scrutiny - The Atlantic

    A former HSUS investigator details the dangers of HR 589, makes it illegal for investigative reporters to take jobs at factory farms in Iowa.

    Earlier this month, politicians in Iowa bowed to corporate pressure when they passed a law designed to stifle public debate and keep consumers in the dark. Instead of confronting animal cruelty on factory farms, the top egg- and pork-producing state is now in the business of covering it up. As one of the people this new law is designed to silence, I'm concerned that Iowa is shooting the messenger while letting the real criminals go unpunished.

    HF 589 (PDF), better known as the "Ag Gag" law, criminalizes investigative journalists and animal protection advocates who take entry-level jobs at factory farms in order to document the rampant food safety and animal welfare abuses within. In recent years, these undercover videos have spurred changes in our food system by showing consumers the disturbing truth about where most of today's meat, eggs, and dairy is produced. Undercover investigations have directly led to America's largest meat recalls, as well as to the closure of several slaughterhouses that had egregiously cruel animal handling practices. Iowa's Ag Gag law -- along with similar bills pending in other states -- illustrates just how desperate these industries are to keep this information from getting out.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. SeabudGator

    SeabudGator GC Hall of Fame

    1,069
    601
    433
    Apr 23, 2014
    Here are the legal factors:
    - Did the person consent to be interviewed? If so, they knew they were being taped.
    - Is the person a public figure? If so, that impacts/limits their ability to sue for libel/slander.
    - What did the contract say? Here is an article on the contracts these idiots sign and they contain releases, point out the person is a public figure, and cite the 1st amendment. Sacha Baron Cohen Pranked Me, Can I Sue? Yes. Win? Not So Much.

    The Moore lawsuit will have nothing to do with him being an idiot (given). The ONLY potential liability is the "pedophile meter". That is an allegation of a felony and leads to the defamation claim (Moore cant claim defamation for the idiotic things he said b/c you cant defame yourself). However, Roy Moore has been accused of sexual misconduct with girls aged 14, 16, and 17. The age of consent is 16 (Alabama), 17 or 18 in different states so I'm thinking Cohen has a case here (aged used to be 10 years old - so much for the "good old days" - yuck). This is first amendment protected satire of a public figure and Moore is very likely to lose.

    Ultimately, and more importantly, Moore has a history of accusations of sexual misconduct from girls under 18 to go with his racist history. Ignoring the legal issue on which I think he loses, this guy claiming to be "baited" is the height of irony. I hope he wallows in misery for his sorry past.
     
  16. tilly

    tilly Superhero Moderator with bulletproof posts! Moderator VIP Member

    Same reason we have most laws. To protect the innocent. Eventually an innocent person will be destroyed by thsi stuff.
     
  17. gatorknights

    gatorknights GC Hall of Fame

    23,940
    1,788
    983
    Apr 8, 2007
    Gainesville, FL
    I just have some questions regarding SBC and his schtick. Does he need to have the victims errrr co-stars sign a release form before SBC can release the movie? The other one is, with all the candid camera type shows out there, how can these people not know that it's a goof? Just asking, I really don't know. I mean SBC, The Impractical Jokers, Jamie Kennedy Experiment, NBC's "What Would You Do?" etc etc.

    Edit: Seabud hit on some of those.
     
  18. steveGator52

    steveGator52 All American

    467
    54
    243
    May 3, 2016
    DC Metro area
    Seriously?

    What SBC is doing is trying to represent that he is part of a 60 Minutes type news show, and then ambushing the guest with questions like those asked on The Daily Show. One is well known as a comedy/satire show, while the other is supposed to a serious news show. If SBC represented the show as something similar to The Daily Show, then there would be no issues, but he doesn’t do that.

    If SBC lured Moore to the show under the pretense that this was a serious news interview, and Moore signed the release based on that understanding, then I don’t see how there wouldn’t be a fraud issue. If it is ok to lie to someone to get them to sign a release, or have them sign a release under false pretenses and then hold it over their heads when they try to leave, then something is wrong with our laws.

    SNL is a well-known comedy skit show, and people treat it as such if invited to participate. Any participant in SNL is under no pretense that that they are participating in a serious news show, but that they are participating in a comedy show. Same thing with guests invited on The Daily Show.

    Not even the least bit equivalent to what SBC does.
     
  19. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    8,962
    1,768
    568
    Oct 30, 2017
    That's the thing, I didn't see it. I saw a public figure get mocked by a parody show. That's quite normal.

    How will an innocent person be harmed? If you're caught saying hateful stuff on camera, you're not innocent.

    Should have read the fine print in the release before signing if that's the issue. Average Joe's get screwed over every day by that axiom. And I'm not talking about the layout of the show. I'm talking about public figures being mocked and ridiculed.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. BigCypressGator1981

    BigCypressGator1981 Premium Member

    1,733
    318
    368
    Oct 11, 2011
    SBC's contracts are IRONCLAD. Moore signed it. Game over.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2