1. Welcome to VegasMessageBoard
    It appears you are visiting our community as a guest.
    In order to view full-size images, participate in discussions, vote in polls, etc, you will need to Log in or Register.

Sahara Suing Scott Roeben Over Closure Rumour

Discussion in 'Misc. Vegas Chat' started by breanna61, Aug 7, 2020.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. alanleroy

    alanleroy Click my avatar

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,542
    Trips to Las Vegas:
    87
    That's why I put 'retraction' in quotes. He basically removed the article and called it retracting a rumor. He's always been kind of a smartass.
     
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2020
  2. UKFanatic

    UKFanatic The Arbiter of Taste Caviar Kid

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2010
    Messages:
    13,642
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Trips to Las Vegas:
    50
    No. That's absolutely wrong. 100% NOT a legal defense. If the plaintiff proves the defendant lied in this particular report (which is the plaintiff's burden), just because the defendant had sources and accurate reports in the past does not absolve the defendant from defamation in the present case. This misconception is the reason why in civil court its very hard to introduce evidence of previous good or bad actions. Because evidence of past good or bad behavior is rarely proof that the present behavior was good or bad.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. alanleroy

    alanleroy Click my avatar

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,542
    Trips to Las Vegas:
    87
    Plaintiff must prove malice in Nevada. Defendant can demonstrate he was depending on sources that have been reliable 8 times in the past. It absolutely is a defense against the required malicious intent. It's pretty clear he wasn't inventing this from thin air. He wasn't making up lies. He was reporting the words of people who work at Sahara. Anonymous people who have been accurate in the past. I don't think they have a case unless (as you have mentioned) there are other facts that prove he was maliciously lying about this. I think they're just trying to shut him up by making him lawyer up.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. Golfer

    Golfer Low-Roller

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2016
    Messages:
    447
    Trips to Las Vegas:
    30
    NRS 41.637  “Good faith communication in furtherance of the right to petition or the right to free speech in direct connection with an issue of public concern” defined.  “Good faith communication in furtherance of the right to petition or the right to free speech in direct connection with an issue of public concern” means any:

    1.  Communication that is aimed at procuring any governmental or electoral action, result or outcome;

    2.  Communication of information or a complaint to a Legislator, officer or employee of the Federal Government, this state or a political subdivision of this state, regarding a matter reasonably of concern to the respective governmental entity;

    3.  Written or oral statement made in direct connection with an issue under consideration by a legislative, executive or judicial body, or any other official proceeding authorized by law; or

    4.  Communication made in direct connection with an issue of public interest in a place open to the public or in a public forum,

    Ê which is truthful or is made without knowledge of its falsehood.

    (Added to NRS by 1997, 1364; A 1997, 2593; 2013, 623)
     
  5. ken2v

    ken2v 200,000 and counting

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    25,775
    Location:
    America's most valuable agricultural expanse
    Trips to Las Vegas:
    110
    How about just behaving like a responsible writer?
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  6. Golfer

    Golfer Low-Roller

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2016
    Messages:
    447
    Trips to Las Vegas:
    30
    NRS 41.650  Limitation of liability.  A person who engages in a good faith communication in furtherance of the right to petition or the right to free speech in direct connection with an issue of public concern is immune from any civil action for claims based upon the communication.

    (Added to NRS by 1993, 2848; A 1997, 1365, 2593; 2013, 623)
     
  7. Golfer

    Golfer Low-Roller

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2016
    Messages:
    447
    Trips to Las Vegas:
    30
    Is a medium a platform, or an editor / content provider? Apparently the FCC has been directed to look into this issue. I doubt it goes anywhere, but it is an interesting topic, and both sides have some pretty valid concerns. It's difficult, but not impossible, to bring a tort against a post on a platform, but it has been done. It's an extremely high bar. All this said, and as an example, I post in broad generalities when I post about a specific restaurant, casino etc. I would think anyone who takes a moment to think through the consequences would, and especially if they would like to protect their net worth. So platforms likely don't insure for personal injury (libel, slander, defamation, wrongful eviction). Editors do, but they still enjoy broad immunity.

    This tort is going nowhere, and especially in Nevada. But there should be a lesson learned by the medium that posted the "rumor." That being if it is a real business, generating real revenue, they should act like a real business and purchase insurance and retain the the services of competent counsel.
     
  8. HHFan

    HHFan High-Roller

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2018
    Messages:
    546
    Trips to Las Vegas:
    10
    No longer working there as of 5/1 according to his previous posts. Stated he left to work on Vital Vegas full time. In the vein of his posting style, seems like an odd time to leave a steady paycheck to attempt to monetize a blog about a town ravaged by the virus experiencing cratering demand, so maybe not the actual story. I don’t have any sources though. :poke:
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Patman

    Patman VIP Whale

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,129
    Location:
    BC Canada
    Trips to Las Vegas:
    23
    The Casino bosses have a price on Scott's head. He used to have a spot on the local news. He said something, or did something (not really sure) and then they parted ways. He's no longer at FSE so he can pursue other opportunities (isn't that the standard line when you get canned). Now this. You can't take someone out into the desert anymore and just whack them off. This is corporate Vegas. You hit someone with legal attacks instead of bats. Maybe Oscar Goodman would come out of retirement to defend him. Not quite as sexy as the mob but might make a good story for Vegas history at some point. :)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. BillDonovan

    BillDonovan Low-Roller

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    170
    Trips to Las Vegas:
    45
    Reminds us of the short sellers posting implied company “rumor” messages in online stock trading forums, then some being sued for doing so.
     
    • Wow! Wow! x 1
  11. Sonya

    Sonya Queen of VMB

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 1999
    Messages:
    35,803
    Location:
    Western Washington
    Trips to Las Vegas:
    24
    I have long asked people here not to use VitalVegas as a source for information because of exactly this issue. He loves to throw everything against the wall and then claim a victory when something sticks. It's irresponsible, IMO. And he's been wrong more often than he's been right so a selective list of things that turned out to happen isn't that clarifying unless you list all the rumors that didn't come true right next to those that did.

    Now, someone in this thread has reported it as a violation of our rules about defaming other boards. :rolleyes2:

    This was legitimately posted because it's news related to the general interest of this board. A rumor mill has been sued by a casino. What happens in the courts, happens in the courts, but the news here is that Sahara hit back at him and he's still doubling down on it. IMO, that tells you all you need to know about him. It's not the same as singling out another board just because you have a beef with them. Whether you like it or not, his being sued is news pertinent to our board because so many of you believe his rumors are truth, given how many of you tried to spread his rumors here as facts here over the last 5 months, especially.

    But it is true that I generally don't like people bashing other boards, just as I wouldn't like it if it was another board trashing us. So, I'm going to go ahead and close this to further comments.
     
    • Like Like x 6
    • Love Love x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.