Local Lawyer Discusses LCG's Lawsuit Against Man Behind Antifa Scare

Local Lawyer Discusses LCG's Lawsuit Against Man Behind Antifa Scare

3 controlled issue- i was going to be protected speech and so- i didn't see a whole lot coming out of this the optics of the suit didn't look super great we know that there were some issues with some of the- system of executive orders that- mister guillory implemented about protests and whatnot so.

There was a lot of heat coming on it but i wanted to reserve reserve judgment so i really got a better appreciation of the facts and- after.

That's a look at petition- i realize that there's actually more to this story so.

There's two narratives at play here there's the narrative that the lafayette government is.

Putting forward and then there's the narrative that the defendant you know mister miracle.

Is going forward.

And so obviously we're aware of the first amendment issues- you know his defense is that this is protected speech and that this is nothing more.

Than a frivolous and malicious.

Attempt to silence him and chill free speech and you know there's a lot of.

As words that are being thrown around that are.

Typically used in first amendment style cases- chilling effect is one of them because they will look if you're gonna.

If you're going to sue people for just making up political commentary you know we're going to chill that discussion that's obviously a big issue that the course of architect- but the other side of the coin.

The staff to show up it with a significant presence.

To maintain the peace and order and that would come at a lot of- taxpayer burdens.

And that they would qualify as it damages so the lawsuit.

Is actually framed.

As a tort lawsuit which is a wrongful action lawsuit it's not a spree speech lawsuit is not a federal laws this is in.

The fifteenth judicial district is in lafayette parish.

They're arguing that this is negligence that this guy.

Made these events.

And he was negligent because it led to people believing it was real which forced the police to show up.

On mass at the mall and he should have known better because this is the second a bit he had created.

And so the government is trying to recoup the losses that they had to expand to pay the police to go.

And go out there waste their time.

So they're they're framing it as just a negligence suit- the defendant has actually filed a motion to dismiss the suit- and his attorney gave a public statement about it and- he said that- you know he's a lot of the buzz words that he.

Said that the petition.

One of the that we need one la first year law student with be able to see that you can't.

Have a cause of.

Based on the language of negligence- ends and so he was trying to say there's no real teeth to the petition it's just a bunch of smoke and mirrors and is trying to bully- the defendant and- basically silence all other.

People who could do things that are similar to that but what i found very interesting is that- as a tort lawyer.

We basically of negligence language the time.

It's perfectly okay to say that you've got this guy did something that was negligent and let the damages they were foreseeable he calls them.

Therefore you're entitled to.

Recover damages whatever step of course so i found his.

Comments very puzzling for that he also said that.

The public widely believed that these events were legitimate.

Which.

To me.