News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Ohio cops who raided home. Parent comment

Re:Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Oh... by giantg2 on Thursday March 19, 2026 @12:43PM (#47442246)
"All they have to prove is that they fear for their life. It does not have to make sense, does not have to be 'justified', etc."

That's not really true. The standard is a reasonable fear for your life. That's reasonable standard is evaluated in court by how a reasonable person would have reacted. Yes, they do give some deference to the individual who was actually there (police or civilian). The real problems happen because the DA and the courts tend to have bias when it comes to subjecting members of the system to the same process that others face.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Oh... by PaulDavisThe1st on Thursday March 19, 2026 @02:04PM (#47443403)
Police officers in court cases don't have to meet that standard until it established that they do not have qualified immunity. In vastly more than 9 out of 10 cases, they do, and thus that standard is completely irrelevant.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Oh... by giantg2 on Thursday March 19, 2026 @03:08PM (#47444327)
Qualified immunity only applies to civil cases, not criminal.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Oh... by PaulDavisThe1st on Thursday March 19, 2026 @03:34PM (#47444681)
Most (not all) cases against police officers for excessive/fatal use of force are civil (typically civil rights violations).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Oh... by fireflash38 on Thursday March 19, 2026 @03:51PM (#47444910)
Oh good. So you'll still be dead, and they might get a reprimand. If you're lucky they'll lose their job.
[ Parent | on HN ]