Chicagoist: Ageist Trib Retracts 'All Senior Citizens Look Alike' Statement

casino gambling

Thu, 30 Mar 2006 02:19:54 -0600

casino gambling Probaly you should read this. casino gambling Hope this helps. See you next life. Buy casino gambling now

casino gambling

Thu, 30 Mar 2006 02:19:33 -0600

casino gambling Probaly you should read this. casino gambling Hope this helps. See you next life. Buy casino gambling now

free poker

Tue, 07 Mar 2006 09:55:51 -0600

free poker Have a nice day :)

free poker

Tue, 07 Mar 2006 09:54:51 -0600

free poker Have a nice day :)

smokey

Sat, 30 Apr 2005 21:55:10 -0600

Sadly - the paper has now published four needless photo goofs in one week. Here's the latest . . . Adding insult to injury, the paper this week also admitted to running an incorrect photo of a mob murder victim and Friday slighted two well-known black congressmen for not getting their names or photos straight on an Inside Front page. http://visualeditors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=19176#19176

Pluto's Dad

Fri, 29 Apr 2005 10:30:48 -0600

That one headline, "two men sue" if you look at the very first sentence of the story, it says only the one guy is still suing. These people can't even fact check one sentence down! That was AP not the Trib, which doesn't make me feel better. If it were me I would think it is funny. But the man suing is a business owner. No doubt he has clients that are worried about him. Maybe they didn't read the Tempo section that has the retraction. Or else maybe he'd be in a negotiation for a contract and someone would look him up on the net and find this. Once an accusation like that is made, it follows you around. I can understand him being mad and saying it will affect his business. How much, however, I have no idea. I don't know if it's worth the amount he's suing for.

pm

Fri, 29 Apr 2005 09:57:00 -0600

My hope is for these individuals to focus on overcoming this horrible event (horrible? I find it pretty humorous actually) and not so much on which lawyer and which cause. But shame on the tribune though…

M

Fri, 29 Apr 2005 09:25:22 -0600

Whatever ... if it'd been me, I'd have thought it was cool as all hell. My friends and I would be joking about it for years.

jetgirl

Fri, 29 Apr 2005 08:06:54 -0600

i'm no legal expert, but i can buy that it was a mistake - the first time. the fact that it happened twice, though... that's at the very least sloppy and at the most negligent. if the two men join forces in the courtroom, i think their case would be a lot stronger.

Sean

Thu, 28 Apr 2005 20:35:05 -0600

We have two hack newspapers in our fine city.

Sean

Thu, 28 Apr 2005 20:34:35 -0600

Wow, in a city like ours, we have two hack newspapers.

Justin Randolph

Thu, 28 Apr 2005 20:20:12 -0600

Hi, I just wanted to comment on the underlying legal issues in this case. Although it is clear that the Trib tried to undo the damage to Mr. Calabrese with their retraction and explanation, the damage is probably already done. From memory and a quick review of the law in Illinois (and don't quote me or follow this advice in anyway as it's not my field and I always got bad grades anyway) the standard for defamation in this state is one of negligence rather than actual malice. The Trib has linked poor Mr. Calabrese (no relation I'm assuming) with the Mob. Under Illinois law, this would appear to be a case of "per se" (as opposed to "per quod" - whatever the hell that means) defamation and is actionable as such. In a case of "per se" defamation damages are presumed and Mr. Calabrese may not need to prove actual damages to recover from the Trib. It also looks like Mr. Calabrese may be able to recover for mental suffering and any resulting bodily harm, humiliation, and any injury to personal or professional relationships as well as his standing in the community. If Mr. Calabrese could prove actual malice, he may also be able to recover punitive damages. Though this really sounds like a case of lazy stupidity - which is a common problem with the press - so I doubt he will be awarded punitive damages if he won his case. Shite! Was that defamatory? Well, the truth is a defense to defamation and I'd have to say that there is clear evidence (at least since 2001) that, for the most part, the press is stupid and lazy. Anyhoo, it looks like the Trib attempted to minimize the damage done to his reputation so we'll see how much a jury wants to give him, if the judge ever lets the case get to one. Justin Randolph