Once again BJ Penn brings shame to us all

[HiloJulie]

The link takes you to a 4-part Instagram post made by BJ Penn. (The other 3 parts are just fun to watch)

The first to appear is a video meme where the Penn verbally attacks Medeiros. 

Printed on top of that video meme is as follows:

@govjoshgreen right hand Nani
Medeiros BF is Ryan Watanabe 
M. Watanabe Electrical 
Contractor, Inc.

Printed on the bottom of that video meme is as follows:

This is serious business alright
is Watanabe getting contracts
from Nani & Josh stealing?

The legal definition of defamation is:

• Defamation is any false information that harms the reputation of a person, business, or organization. Defamation includes both libel and slander. Libel generally refers to defamatory statements that are published or broadcast (more permanent) while slander refers to verbal defamatory statements (more fleeting).
  

Typically, a public figure cannot sue or be sued for defamation. That leaves out Nani & Josh.

But the sheer wording of Penn's video meme is by definition FALSE information, easily provable to be false and, one could argue, harms the reputation of a person, business, or organization - that being Ryan Watanabe, a private citizen himself and his company M. Watanabe Electrical Contractor, Inc.

On Penn's Instagram page there are also several other posted memes basically making the same allegation against Ryan Watanabe and his company.

The only person who can make the decision sue is Ryan Watanabe. The chances are he won't do a thing. This is Hawaii after all where bullies like Penn, generally, get away with being total and complete asshole jerks and no one does nothing about it. Including allowing DUI's, fraudulent lawsuits claiming voter fraud - all the way to the State Supreme Court - and, if you noticed on his Instagram page - still bashing everyone and everything related to elections and my particular favorite, running for Governor on the platform that TMT is Chinese owned and is a Chinese laser.

But with all of the rebuilding to be done in Maui - Watanabe's company could be involved. Billions of dollars of work will eventually be awarded to a host of local contractors. Watanabe included. All 100% legitimately. But Penn's memes - could cast a shadow that could cause his company to suffer. Or delay contract awards. Every other electrical contractor bidding for work COULD potentially protest any work awarded to Watanabe. Demand lengthy investigations. One never knows. 

Legally, Watanabe has a case. If he decides to pursue it is another matter.

[TomK]

Typically, a public figure cannot sue or be sued for defamation.

That is not true. It can be harder for a public figure to sue for defamation, you have to show malice, but a public figure can sue or be sued.  How can you claim a public figure can't be sued? See Depp v Heard.

[HiloJulie]

TomK Wrote:

That is not true. It can be harder for a public figure to sue for defamation, you have to show malice, but a public figure can sue or be sued.  How can you claim a public figure can't be sued? See Depp v Heard.

Thats why I said TYPICALLY.

TYPICALLY, the ability to sue a public figure is much more involved in proof and legal requirements. Further, public government officials are even harder to sue for defamation.

Additionally, Penn is not even close to being considered a public figure with his political babble. He is a private citizen. 

Again, Watanabe has a case.

[TomK]

TYPICALLY, the ability to sue a public figure is much more involved in proof and legal requirements.

That makes no sense. How does suing a public figure mean it's "much more involved in proof and legal requirements."? What does "much more involved in proof" mean?  How about citing some case law and be done with this argument?

Please remember, you made the claim that "Typically, a public figure cannot sue or be sued for defamation.". What law or part of the constitution means a public figure typically can't be sued or cannot sue?

[offgridguy]

Don't mind me, I'll just be over here eating my popcorn

[HiloJulie]

TYPICALLY, the ability to sue a public figure is much more involved in proof and legal requirements.

That makes no sense. How does suing a public figure mean it's "much more involved in proof and legal requirements."? What does "much more involved in proof" mean?  How about citing some case law and be done with this argument?

Please remember, you made the claim that "Typically, a public figure cannot sue or be sued for defamation.". What law or part of the constitution means a public figure typically can't be sued or cannot sue?

I think this explains what I’ve been saying all along. 

https://www.pbs.org/standards/media-law-101/defamation/

Again, Watanabe has a case.

ETA: If suing public officials was as easy peasy as you seem to imply, todays House Judiciary Committee’s hearing would result in several hundred potential cases of defamation.

I’m also intrigued as to why you feel it necessary to berate me over my comments with such tenacity while saying nothing about the stuff Penn has said.

[Rob Tucker]

I wish you folks would grow slightly thicker skins and quit the useless squabbling.

[HiloJulie]

My apologies Rob. 

I now see one of Penn’s latest memes on his Instagram page is a quote attributed to a Quaker Missionary who died in 1855 as his own.

Quote source:

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7502834...-good-that

Penn post:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CxXa_MRuD3h/...ODBiNWFlZA==

I’m sure he got Israel’s estate’s permission to use his music nonetheless!

[offgridguy]

Yawn.