Jesse Ventura wins $1.84M in defamation suit v. Chris Kyle

[VMI77]

As to the claims made in the WaPo article, yes, it appears that Kyle exaggerated (or lied, if you will) about his "exploits" after mustering out of the Navy, but that's not surprising to me. He wanted to stay in, but his wife wanted him to leave. He probably missed the adrenalin rush of combat and tried to make up for it by telling stories. He wouldn't be the first vet who did that. But his accomplishments while in the service are unchallengeable. And it's quite interesting to me that WaPo chose to publish this after the verdict. It's the ancient American "sport" of taking the successful and revered down a notch or two after we've elevated them to sainthood.

Why does it appear that way to you? I don't see any evidence one way or another. For instance, the WaPo article claims the gas station shooting cannot be confirmed but links to another article that claims it is confirmed. If it's not true then it's not an exaggeration at all, but an outright lie. I read the book and he didn't strike me as a liar but I don't think there is any way to really know --at least based on what has been published in the media.

[baldeagle]

As to the claims made in the WaPo article, yes, it appears that Kyle exaggerated (or lied, if you will) about his "exploits" after mustering out of the Navy, but that's not surprising to me. He wanted to stay in, but his wife wanted him to leave. He probably missed the adrenalin rush of combat and tried to make up for it by telling stories. He wouldn't be the first vet who did that. But his accomplishments while in the service are unchallengeable. And it's quite interesting to me that WaPo chose to publish this after the verdict. It's the ancient American "sport" of taking the successful and revered down a notch or two after we've elevated them to sainthood.

Why does it appear that way to you? I don't see any evidence one way or another. For instance, the WaPo article claims the gas station shooting cannot be confirmed but links to another article that claims it is confirmed. If it's not true then it's not an exaggeration at all, but an outright lie. I read the book and he didn't strike me as a liar but I don't think there is any way to really know --at least based on what has been published in the media.

It appears that way to me because I think it's highly doubtful that he and another sniper killed 30 people in New Orleans during the Katrina disaster. Something like that would have been front page news, especially if any one of the 30 was black. I don't know why he would make up such a story, but I think it's clear that he did. In any case, he's dead now, and I think he should be allowed to rest in peace without dragging him through the mud in an attempt to rehabilitate someone else.

[VMI77]

As to the claims made in the WaPo article, yes, it appears that Kyle exaggerated (or lied, if you will) about his "exploits" after mustering out of the Navy, but that's not surprising to me. He wanted to stay in, but his wife wanted him to leave. He probably missed the adrenalin rush of combat and tried to make up for it by telling stories. He wouldn't be the first vet who did that. But his accomplishments while in the service are unchallengeable. And it's quite interesting to me that WaPo chose to publish this after the verdict. It's the ancient American "sport" of taking the successful and revered down a notch or two after we've elevated them to sainthood.

Why does it appear that way to you? I don't see any evidence one way or another. For instance, the WaPo article claims the gas station shooting cannot be confirmed but links to another article that claims it is confirmed. If it's not true then it's not an exaggeration at all, but an outright lie. I read the book and he didn't strike me as a liar but I don't think there is any way to really know --at least based on what has been published in the media.

It appears that way to me because I think it's highly doubtful that he and another sniper killed 30 people in New Orleans during the Katrina disaster. Something like that would have been front page news, especially if any one of the 30 was black. I don't know why he would make up such a story, but I think it's clear that he did. In any case, he's dead now, and I think he should be allowed to rest in peace without dragging him through the mud in an attempt to rehabilitate someone else.

A lot of stuff went on during Katrina that we'll never know about. I agree that it sounds far fetched, but given the chaos and the undoubtedly covert nature of the operation if it did happen, it seems possible, though unlikely, and I also think it's possible it would escape the news and the deaths written off as violence.

[Jim Beaux]

A lot of stuff went on during Katrina that we'll never know about. I agree that it sounds far fetched, but given the chaos and the undoubtedly covert nature of the operation if it did happen, it seems possible, though unlikely, and I also think it's possible it would escape the news and the deaths written off as violence.

I think it very improbable that the feds would send in a team to shoot mere dregs who were taking stuff that was close to being salvage. The risk vs. reward is astronomical - especially when the vast majority of the targets would have been minorities.

My first question is why? What would be the objective?

I also question setting up a sniper post on the dome. There are high rise buildings nearby that would offer better logistics and cover (especially from all the news helicopters) So if the objective was to stop looting, two snipers wouldnt have been very effective against the mass of looters.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Obviously, I didn't see the evidence or hear the testimony, so I don't know if the incident with Ventura happened or not. It was enough to convince 8 of 10 jurors that the suit was well-founded. I find it almost laughable that Ventura would claim it was never about the money, then, in the same interview, claim that a loss in trial would have been financially devastating.

Of this I am sure; if Ventura's true goal was to restore his reputation, he failed miserably. He will be forever known as a guy who sued the widow of a war hero. That doesn't prompt people to hang your picture over their bed. It doesn't matter that the suit was filed before Chris died, Ventura didn't drop the suit when he was killed. I hope he finds obscurity a very lonely place.

Chas.

[b322da]

In steps the lamb where lions fear to tread.

I think that it may be somewhat disingenuous of this forum to fairly unanimously consider a decedent's estate to be his "widow," particularly where much, but by no means all, of the financial value of that estate may have come from the sale of what a jury has found to be defamatory material, and with the jury having found that nearly 3/4 of the damages assessed were for unjust enrichment. Furthermore, a real question as to who will pay what, considering that the other defendant, the publisher, apparently had insufficient insurance, is there in between the lines.

I look forward to hearing from someone who, when it happens, can let us know a little more about the ultimate outcome of the lawsuit.

I am taking no position on the merits of the lawsuit. I know only what I read in the OP's cite, which appears to most commentators here to be quite adequate on which to base one's conclusions.

Jim

[Jim Beaux]

In steps the lamb where lions fear to tread.

I think that it may be somewhat disingenuous of this forum to fairly unanimously consider a decedent's estate to be his "widow," particularly where much, but by no means all, of the financial value of that estate may have come from the sale of what a jury has found to be defamatory material, and with the jury having found that nearly 3/4 of the damages assessed were for unjust enrichment. Furthermore, a real question as to who will pay what, considering that the other defendant, the publisher, apparently had insufficient insurance, is there in between the lines.

I look forward to hearing from someone who, when it happens, can let us know a little more about the ultimate outcome of the lawsuit.

I am taking no position on the merits of the lawsuit. I know only what I read in the OP's cite, which appears to most commentators here to be quite adequate on which to base one's conclusions.

Jim

It is instinctive to extend benevolence & make concessions for the welfare of young widows with children. Nothing disingenuous about this as there is not a person here who wouldnt want every benefit for our loved ones in such a case.

It is my understanding that the publisher was not a part of this suit and has no liability. I also dont think JV has a case against the publisher. It never printed anything derogatory about him. It merely printed a book that made reference to an unknown as "Scruff face"

[b322da]

...It is my understanding that the publisher was not a part of this suit and has no liability. I also dont think JV has a case against the publisher. It never printed anything derogatory about him. It merely printed a book that made reference to an unknown as "Scruff face"....

I quote from the OP's cite, "...The $500,000 awarded Ventura for defamation will be paid by the insurance from book publisher HarperCollins, but the $1.3 million unjust enrichment award will presumably come from the money earned from the book, which has sold 1.5 million copies, and from a film based on it that is now in production and directed by Clint Eastwood...."

It would be interesting to know how much money was earned from the sale of 1.5 million copies, and has been earned and is likely to be earned from the film. That is precisely the kind of evidence one would expect would have been put before the jury to assist it in making a reasonable unjust enrichment award.

Jim

[EEllis]

...It is my understanding that the publisher was not a part of this suit and has no liability. I also dont think JV has a case against the publisher. It never printed anything derogatory about him. It merely printed a book that made reference to an unknown as "Scruff face"....

I quote from the OP's cite, "...The $500,000 awarded Ventura for defamation will be paid by the insurance from book publisher HarperCollins, but the $1.3 million unjust enrichment award will presumably come from the money earned from the book, which has sold 1.5 million copies, and from a film based on it that is now in production and directed by Clint Eastwood...."

It would be interesting to know how much money was earned from the sale of 1.5 million copies, and has been earned and is likely to be earned from the film. That is precisely the kind of evidence one would expect would have been put before the jury to assist it in making a reasonable unjust enrichment award.

Jim

I've heard numbers from 3 to 6 mil. I figure it's probably at least 3 with more in the pipeline as the book keeps selling and I have no doubt the estate will get a cut of the movie. Heck in some ways the lawsuit is probably good for the estate. Kyles book didn't really take off until the added press that came from the back and forth with JV. This keeps it in the press and will end up meaning more book sales and more tickets. The idea that JV is going after a poor widow is pure fantasy.

[baldeagle]

Whatever you may think of Jesse, the SEAL community thinks very strongly about him.

From Brandon Webb of SOFREP:
…Because of NSW’s celebrity, it’s even more important for SEALs to look at how they conduct themselves in the public eye and on social media. “Will what I’m about to do reflect positively on the SEAL community?” It’s a question I’ve been asking myself a lot these days, and the crux of my problem with Jesse Ventura.
*
…The smartest thing I’ve heard come out of Jesse’s mouth was when he was quoted after the recent verdict saying, “There are no winners in this.” In fact, Jesse is the biggest loser in the end (next to the NSW community itself). This is a career ender for him, and an irrecoverable PR nightmare. His career as he used to know it is over.
*
…And if Ventura was really concerned about the truth, and not the money, he should have told Taya Kyle on the courthouse steps that the $1.8M was hers to keep now that his name was cleared. But people with financial motivations don’t make this move.
*
My problem with Jesse is not the alleged altercation between him and Chris, it’s about what happened after. Jesse (Janos) Ventura had plenty of opportunities to take the high ground in how he handled the situation. Instead, he made a series of bad decisions, the worst of which was to drag an American Hero’s widow and family in court, as if they haven’t suffered enough with their recent loss. As the father of three amazing children myself, I can’t imagine this scenario. It’s horrific.
*
This is a sacred line, not to be crossed, ever Janos, and you will now have to live with the long-term consequences including a SEAL community that is polarized against your actions.

As for the claim that the story of Jesse is what sold the book, the evidence suggests otherwise.

'Sniper' sells: Former Navy SEAL Chris Kyle's American Sniper was an instant best seller when it was published 13 months ago. But after Kyle, 38, was shot and killed Feb. 2 at a Texas shooting range, book sales are soaring. The memoir is No. 2 on USA TODAY's Best-Selling Books list, up from No. 113 last week. In January 2012, it landed at No. 10 and stayed in the top 25 for eight weeks. Actor Bradley Cooper, who bought the film rights, plans to star as Kyle in a movie adaptation but has yet to sign a director.

[VMI77]

A lot of stuff went on during Katrina that we'll never know about. I agree that it sounds far fetched, but given the chaos and the undoubtedly covert nature of the operation if it did happen, it seems possible, though unlikely, and I also think it's possible it would escape the news and the deaths written off as violence.

I think it very improbable that the feds would send in a team to shoot mere dregs who were taking stuff that was close to being salvage. The risk vs. reward is astronomical - especially when the vast majority of the targets would have been minorities.

My first question is why? What would be the objective?

I also question setting up a sniper post on the dome. There are high rise buildings nearby that would offer better logistics and cover (especially from all the news helicopters) So if the objective was to stop looting, two snipers wouldnt have been very effective against the mass of looters.

Yes, I agree, but you're assuming a Federal government top down command scenario and I'm assuming that IF any such thing took place it was a limited and contained rogue operation outside the chain of command. There was time when I'd have dismissed it out of hand, but under the government we've got now, lots of things are possible.

[Charles L. Cotton]

The idea that JV is going after a poor widow is pure fantasy.

I don't know anything about the lawsuit, other than what has been in the media. Even if Chris' wife wasn't a named party, Ventura was going after her as she is the beneficiary of his estate. Whatever he takes from Chris' estate is something his widow will not receive.

On the subject of fantasy, any finding by a jury of unjust enrichment due to the inclusion of the Kyle/Ventura incident, if any, is pure fantasy. There's no way to provide reliable evidence as to how much more money was generated by the inclusion of that event in the book. If the case had been filed and tried in Texas, it's doubtful the jury would have even seen that question in the jury charge. We correctly don't allow recovery of speculative damages.

As I said before, I didn't see the evidence or hear the testimony, but I suspect the verdict was influenced by the fact that it was tried in Minnesota (Ventura country) and the defendant was not a favorite son. I may be wrong, but there must be some explanation for the jury award on purely speculative damages.

Chas.

[The Annoyed Man]

Not that I'm any kind of fan of JV's, but I want to correct an impression about UDT's......the idea that they seldom see combat. I don't remember the exact number, but there were somewhere around 120 UDT's killed at Normandy.......by enemy fire. At Iwo Jima, where my dad fought, there were a dozen or more UDT's killed. Nearly every island assault in the Pacific resulted in UDT KIA. They may not have seen that much action during the Vietnam war because of the naissance of the SEAL teams, but it would be wrong to say that they were never combat deployed, or killed in action due to enemy fire.

[C-dub]

Not that I'm any kind of fan of JV's, but I want to correct an impression about UDT's......the idea that they seldom see combat. I don't remember the exact number, but there were somewhere around 120 UDT's killed at Normandy.......by enemy fire. At Iwo Jima, where my dad fought, there were a dozen or more UDT's killed. Nearly every island assault in the Pacific resulted in UDT KIA. They may not have seen that much action during the Vietnam war because of the naissance of the SEAL teams, but it would be wrong to say that they were never combat deployed, or killed in action due to enemy fire.

I think they were primarily talking about after the SEALs were formed and there was a distinction between the two. At least, that was my take on it since they were also talking mostly about the time period when JV served.

[EEllis]

The idea that JV is going after a poor widow is pure fantasy.

I don't know anything about the lawsuit, other than what has been in the media. Even if Chris' wife wasn't a named party, Ventura was going after her as she is the beneficiary of his estate. Whatever he takes from Chris' estate is something his widow will not receive.

On the subject of fantasy, any finding by a jury of unjust enrichment due to the inclusion of the Kyle/Ventura incident, if any, is pure fantasy. There's no way to provide reliable evidence as to how much more money was generated by the inclusion of that event in the book. If the case had been filed and tried in Texas, it's doubtful the jury would have even seen that question in the jury charge. We correctly don't allow recovery of speculative damages.

As I said before, I didn't see the evidence or hear the testimony, but I suspect the verdict was influenced by the fact that it was tried in Minnesota (Ventura country) and the defendant was not a favorite son. I may be wrong, but there must be some explanation for the jury award on purely speculative damages.

Chas.

Nothing I'm seeing makes me think that JV had any preferential treatment or that his popularity affected him in any positive way. During this trial his celebrity works against him by raising the burden of proof and he still managed to convince 8 out of 10 and convince them that he was do considerable recompense. But even tho people haven't seen the evidence it must be the wrong verdict. Going by the response here it's a good thing the trial wasn't it Texas because I don't see how JV could have a fair hearing and that just saddens me. As to the comment you responded to my point was that in its entirety the award would probably be worth maybe a third of what this book has brought to the estate so far leaving the widow anything but poor regardless of the end result.