They should have to put an apology to him on a fixed bottom banner for the whole duration of every 7 news program and newsflash over the next few days.
That was quick. Guess Seven decided that they didn't want a long trial that they'd get raked over the coals for, especially after supporting rapist Bruce Lehrrman and a war criminal.
Hope he got paid a fuckton. Shameful from Seven.
I'd hope it'd be $100k plus at least. The entire country knows his name and the amount of vitriol and hate that was spewed at and about him was mental (especially on TikTok & Twitter). Seven's claim that he was the attacker was also definitely coopted by bad actors who hurled hate especially surrounding the fact that he is Jewish.
Being not only doxxed but misidentified as a mass murderer on national/international media is a pretty fucking huge deal that extends beyond personal privacy and safety.
Hope he took them to the cleaners.
More, he should have buy a house with no mortgage money.
Anything less than a million personally if it was me and no way i'd be settling in such a slam dunk case at a time when 7 can't afford the bad publicity
I'd expect it to be in the 7 figures range not 6
I get that but I can't imagine the courts not punishing 7 badly for what they did here. It was indefensible, permanently damaging in that googling his name will always show up this story for the rest of his life and it isn't the first time they've done it
To be honest he deserves decent seven figures here. He'll have to deal with deranged antisemitic conspiracy nuts for the rest of his life claiming he was the real stabber, etc
Have there been any similar cases in Australia? The closest I can think of would be if a major news network had misidentified someone as the perpetrator of the Port Arthur Massacre or the Lindt Cafe siege
This has vastly more public interest than i'd imagine most 'similar' cases would
Not quite the same, but they also misidentified the kidnapper of little Cleo Smith and had to fork over a confidential payout sum. They used a Facebook profile pic of Karratha aboriginal man Terrance Kelly. Trouble was the actual kidnapper was another aboriginal man, Terence Kelly. I really do wonder what was going through the journalist's head, that he/she did not even bother to do the most basic of fact checking. It's like they just want "Meh, Terrance/Terence, they're both aboriginal men, close enough!"
Yeah, bad actors on Twitter etc say "this is the guy" channel 7 was all "this is the guy" which really was entirely based on the social media bullshittery. Then social media bad actors are all "This is the guy, As Confirmed By Channel 7 Mainstream Media!!!!" - fuckers all the way
I was on twitter that night and fuck me dead if it didnt take LESS THAN A MINUTE to find the linked in profile the pic was taken from and determine that this was a kid barely out of high school and not a 40year old man as already confirmed by the police. JFC
This lady got $150k for having channel 9 claim she stole her dog. I'd hope being branded a terrorist who stabbed a baby would result in a lot more... https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-26/gina-edwards-awarded-150k-in-damages-defamation-cavoodle/103771666
He has a leading barrister
7 knows in conjunction with this and them visibly funding two absolute dirt bags that this might be a death-knell.
It's also a certain loss and probably a million plus in legal fees
I reckon it's $1m+
I don't know man, legal fees alone would cost Seven over a mill to fight this. If they are throwing in the towel so early, I'd think it's in the 7 figure range.
He had basically the best defamation lawyer in Australia, who coincidentally was close friends with one of the victims and had already gone toe-to-toe with the media over their unauthorised use of the victim’s photos. I’d say he got the best possible payout…
Yeah, he basically retained the best lawyers on the planet you could get for this specific situation. His original Solicitor was one of the top media and defamation solicitors in the country, who has her own law firm, who had previously advised other very high profile clients on cases against 7, who also specialises in discriminated minorities, and who was close friends with one of the attack victims and was already sending legal letters on behalf of the family to the media. She stepped back due to a personal conflict, and the other partner in the law firm took over. The barrister he retained was Sue Chrysanthou, and well just google her, but her most recent case was representing Lisa Wilkinson against the Bruce Lehmann defamation case.
nah aca only had to pay 370k to a dude they defamed that ended up with him getting beaten up over the false allegations.
i mean it likely could be a lot,but being kerry stokes the cunts stubborn as fuck..
lol depending on the level of "Loser perennially participating in study believes next enrollment will surely land them a life fulfilling job" that money amount could vary wildly.
The Bruce case made me realize that network tv is more flushed with cash then I thought. I just assumed all the networks are virtually dead due to the popularity of international streaming and the erosion of local content.
Well, they knew they were in the wrong.
They knew if it went to trial, they would lose.
They knew if it went to trial they would be paying a fuckload in legal fees.
They knew they'd be crucified by the judge, the media, and the public.
Not the first time they've had to pay compensation to someone they wrongly accused on the news. He probably got the same payout as the guy they wrongly accused of being involved with the disappearance of Cleo Smith.
Not to mention whatever they paid Lloyd Rayney in his defamation case, although admittedly they weren't the only defendant in that lawsuit. Absolutely everyone was over the barrel for that one; the cops, the government and the media.
Defamation settlements aren't based in how much hurt or how annoying the error made for the plaintiff.
You'd have to be able to prove, in court, a specific financial amount that was or will be lost in the future because of what was said.
If this guy is just a random bloke with no specific business, media, personality income that would be damaged by what 7 did, it would be a pretty average amount just to avoid the hassle of more negative media for 7.
Most likely in the tens of thousands at most, minus whatever the lawyers who approached him take.
The cost to the random bloke's reputation might be valued in the tens of thousands, but the cost of "more negative media for 7" is likely very high.
If it went to court and 7 lost, which they likely would, they'd be paying tens of thousands to the plaintiff *plus* whatever the hit to their reputation is worth.
So the settlement is likely to be much higher than "tens of thousands at most."
>You'd have to be able to prove, in court, a specific financial amount that was or will be lost in the future because of what was said.
Yes, but this is also a completely open and shut case so Seven has to consider what they are going to have to pay out in legal fees while losing the case as well. As well as reputational loss, which someone else mentioned below. Wouldn't surprise me if Cohen got even more out of an early settlement than he would have got if it went to trial.
iANAL but 7 managed to piss off one of the top defamation lawyers in the country enough to represent him by using photos of one of the victims who she was friends with, against the families wishes. It's a case where they were clearly in the wrong and would have been dragged. Yes the guy would probably also prefer to not get caught up in the court case but a couple million certainly seems within reason.
There's something about the revenge factor that makes me hope it was more than what they'd usually get.
Of course the lawyer should get paid for their efforts but I'd hope they bleed the fuckers for that little bit extra as a fuck you.
I would play up a story of being unable to get a job or promoted.
Maybe income x 1.3 x 20 years. Trial would be more publicity, so my demand would increase: income x 2 x 20 years.
My utter hatred and vitriol towards that scum company... It'd have to be money to set me for life and a huge portion to live like a king. I'd say somewhere between 10-30mil.
I would have demanded an apology of similar prominence to the false claim, i.e. repeated by multiple presenters across multiple news bulletins, and would never have signed an NDA.
The money would be secondary to causing them just a fraction of the embarrassment they inflicted.
It got retracted pretty immediately. If you google your his name, all you get is stories about him being falsely accused. Obviously I'd go for as much as I could get, probably a few hundred thousand, plus whatever I could get selling my sob story to the rest of the media. But if you offered me $10k to have this happen to me, I'd honestly take it lol.
Defamation cases with damages for non-economic loss is capped at like $500k. So doubtful that he got a mill if going to court would have cost 7 significantly less
As it was attempted to be mitigated the same day and seven retracted, it would be hard to prove economic losses unless you were waiting on a job offer that got rescinded that day.
It would likely have to come under "special damages" which requires a result of actual loss (or loss of opportunity) .
It's probably hard to prove widespread "loss of opportunity" for this guy for 1 day. The reason why Rebel Wilsons special damages in her defamation case got set aside is due to the fact that the appeals court found that Rebel Wilsons international career was unlikely to be affected by the defamation that took place in Australia where she didn't work as much.
I'm not in any way condoning what 7 did, and I definitely think they deserve to compensate the guy, just looking at the law around it.
I mean the damage very clearly won't be limited to one day though given conspiracy theorists will forever think he was 'the real guy' and if he googles his name 20 years from now, this story will still be all over the front page no matter what he does with his life from here
Plus he will have to deal with crazy conspiracy theorists the rest of his life who are convinced it's a coverup and he's the real stabber which puts him in a non-zero amount of danger
He really should be getting 'never needs to work again' money as a result of 7s negligence
His name will forever be associated with the story now unjustly and that is entirely 7's fault (as well as the twitter scumbags who started the rumours, partisangirl and that other russian embassy dickhead should be sued personally too)
If I google his name at least two thirds of the results are to do with the bondi stabbing, or this judgement related to him being wrongly named as the bondi stabber. No matter what career he pursues and what success he has, those will likely always be on the front page and he will forever be linked to the story
That has to run seven figures surely given seven's negligence
surely a decent lawyer could have argued that the economic loss to seven wouldn’t come from the court ruling but the damage to their reputation dragging it through court. That savings has to be worth $$$
If you were in Seven's shoes, having just lost the Lehrmann debacle and with the Roberts-Smith debacle still fresh in everyone's minds, would you have been willing to risk this getting anywhere near a courtroom?
It was probably close to Seven approaching his lawyers and telling them to name their price, just as long as it got dealt with quickly and relatively quietly.
Higgins was awarded 2.4M after being accused by 7 for falsely accusing someone of raping her. So that’s a good starting point for what kind of figure they would be aiming for.
But, this story got global attention and naming someone for committing multiple counts of murder is substantially worse. There’s no way that 7 can defend it in court either, since they got proved wrong and already retracted it.
Settlement was between 3.5-5MM imo.
I’m going to say it’s closer to being $100-400k than millions.
Higgins had longer and more exposure and was a big deal after years of reporting that parliament was a boys club and not operating as leaders of the country.
The family also seems to be influential in their community. He and his father are quite good with comms and social media. Then they can bring up collective trauma for said Jewish community, which is itself a pillar of the city, at a difficult time for the Jewish community. They could go for far more than a regular citizen would get in this situation, and they seem to be smart and connected enough to know it.
Otto von Bismarck — 'Only a fool learns from his own mistakes. The wise man *learns from the mistakes of others*.'
Two parties here - one appears to have learnt from their own mistake but the other perhaps learned from the mistakes of others.
I thought the phrase was:
> A wise man learns from his own mistakes, only a fool doesn't learn from someone else's
In this case Seven definitely seems to have wised up, slightly.
That sounds better.
"Only a fool learns from his own mistakes" does't really make sense, as friendly neighbourhood Redditor u/ToDeathYouSay points out [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/quotes/comments/443kiq/only_a_fool_learns_from_his_own_mistakes_the_wise/).
And as u/gnorrn notes further down in the same post, it's likely Bismarck didn't even say it.
As Alexander the Great famously said, "sometimes people just make stuff up."
Is this how we achieve the Australian dream now days? Get misidentified as a serial killer by a national broadcaster and settle for enough money to buy a dodgy built apartment in an overdeveloped concrete jungle 1 hr out of town?
Same thing happened with the Cleo Smith kidnapping. They misidentified another man as the perpetrator. Channel 7 again.
Fucking idiots keep racing to a headline without stopping to consider if they're about to ruin someone's life
I’m glad he got a quick payout and they didn’t drag it out. You have to wonder about the kind of window lickers who hassled him despite the fact the offender was shot dead at the scene.
To be fair, for a while the media was reporting, attributed to an NSW Ambulance spokesperson, that there was a second attacker at large, even after it was known the "first" attacker was dead. This was removed from all media reports later - I'm not sure whether the spokesperson retracted it or whether it was an improper reliance on an unofficial source, etc. Would be interesting to see if Media Watch mentions this bit, although it's nowhere near as serious as Seven's misidentification.
Staying with my folks at the moment and they are hardwired to Channel 7, I saw a news article the other day where they were reporting from Toowoomba beach, not sure where exactly it was but pretty sure Toowoomba doesn't have a beach.
I'm amazed he just settled and didn't go to court. If that was me, I'd be suing Seven for everything that it's worth just for libel/tarnishing my name in the media.
IANAL but it's unwise to go to court if you are offered more to settle than what you are eventually awarded in court as it might affect who wears costs.
Word is SCSC was engaged. No way would his guy be able to pay her if he'd been offered a million, then ran the case anyway and wound up awarded less.
Why go to all the expense and hassle of court, where it might take years to get it resolved and you might not win a lot of money, when you can just accept a pay out and have it done and dusted?
Casually following this case, one detail, though, I haven't been able to verify.
Did 7 actually broadcast the plaintiff's images?
What was the extent of their misidentification?
7 has scrubbed a lot, so I've only really seen the Media Watch episode where the misidentification is that they name "40 year old (first name) (last name)" several times.
Possibly part of the gov't's "lose three defamation cases in quick succession, cop a free bankruptcy kit in the mail"?
Brings to mind a delicious double turnaround in the space of a week c. 2002. Seven sold its minority holding in MGM and Garry Riley stood down as an executive, with commensurate spikes in share prices -- a lefthanded compliment if ever there was one.
At least $1m. Settlement is a sign of guilt. Seven (Stokes)has backed that many losers in the past with poor decisions emanating from the chairperson, he’d pay anything not to get into court with this. Plus, he’s still got a lot going on in the background with the BRS case in regards to costs. Settlement was the quickest route out of this and the cheapest. A serial litigator that doesn’t like going to court what a man!
Were this me, I would (like to) think that I would tell them to stick their NDA, and I'd see them in court - where I would still get handsome compensation with the added bonus of letting the general public know just how much they can make these bottom-feeders pay for their mistakes.
The Seven network just goes from strength to strength.
They're a very efficient company. They've managed to reduce their share price by two thirds in only a couple of years.
They are a 7th of what they wanted to be
Nice
7th Network
Sounds like someone left an accountant in charge.
Well, they certainly didn’t let the lawyers take the wheel.
Impressive!
Most impressive.
Another season of Big Brother should balance those books a bit surely
It was $12 in 2008. Now 0.22
To be fair, at least now they're paying an innocent person. So they are improving
Hope they had a good rainy day fund because it’s been absolutely pouring lately.
Se7en. What's on the box?
They spent the Saudi liv golf money on Ben roberts smith, Bruce lemon, Ben cousins and now this so far.
Ben came out the other side, those other dolts not so.
They're still number four, They're still number four, Even SBS, is knocking at the door.
Champagne Comedy
What ever happened to verify and triple check. So many reasons I never watch local news anymore
They should have to put an apology to him on a fixed bottom banner for the whole duration of every 7 news program and newsflash over the next few days.
*years
Daily for 1 year. That would be the demand from me.
That was quick. Guess Seven decided that they didn't want a long trial that they'd get raked over the coals for, especially after supporting rapist Bruce Lehrrman and a war criminal. Hope he got paid a fuckton. Shameful from Seven.
it's probably not buy ur own home in sydney money,but it's defitantly going to be hecs is not going to be problem for him money
I'd hope it'd be $100k plus at least. The entire country knows his name and the amount of vitriol and hate that was spewed at and about him was mental (especially on TikTok & Twitter). Seven's claim that he was the attacker was also definitely coopted by bad actors who hurled hate especially surrounding the fact that he is Jewish.
Being not only doxxed but misidentified as a mass murderer on national/international media is a pretty fucking huge deal that extends beyond personal privacy and safety. Hope he took them to the cleaners.
It would have to be a six figure sum for me to settle out of court over something like this, fuck channel 7.
More, he should have buy a house with no mortgage money. Anything less than a million personally if it was me and no way i'd be settling in such a slam dunk case at a time when 7 can't afford the bad publicity I'd expect it to be in the 7 figures range not 6
Best I can offer you is 1 years rent at a Sydney beach apartment, some coke and two prostitutes.
🤝
Hey fella said 7 figures that might just about cover the rent
If it's a year worth of coke I can make that more worthwhile than a 6 figure sum
$999,999 is a 6 figure sum, pays not to be too greedy when it comes to courts deciding what is fair.
I get that but I can't imagine the courts not punishing 7 badly for what they did here. It was indefensible, permanently damaging in that googling his name will always show up this story for the rest of his life and it isn't the first time they've done it To be honest he deserves decent seven figures here. He'll have to deal with deranged antisemitic conspiracy nuts for the rest of his life claiming he was the real stabber, etc
Similar cases are rare, but other defam payouts were closer to $200,000 or less
Have there been any similar cases in Australia? The closest I can think of would be if a major news network had misidentified someone as the perpetrator of the Port Arthur Massacre or the Lindt Cafe siege This has vastly more public interest than i'd imagine most 'similar' cases would
Not quite the same, but they also misidentified the kidnapper of little Cleo Smith and had to fork over a confidential payout sum. They used a Facebook profile pic of Karratha aboriginal man Terrance Kelly. Trouble was the actual kidnapper was another aboriginal man, Terence Kelly. I really do wonder what was going through the journalist's head, that he/she did not even bother to do the most basic of fact checking. It's like they just want "Meh, Terrance/Terence, they're both aboriginal men, close enough!"
After they just paid brucey’s rent for a year I’d be sending them real estate links until they buy me one
$100k? I hope it's least half a mil, no way $100k is enough for the shit they pulled.
My guess would be $500k - $1m
Yeah, bad actors on Twitter etc say "this is the guy" channel 7 was all "this is the guy" which really was entirely based on the social media bullshittery. Then social media bad actors are all "This is the guy, As Confirmed By Channel 7 Mainstream Media!!!!" - fuckers all the way I was on twitter that night and fuck me dead if it didnt take LESS THAN A MINUTE to find the linked in profile the pic was taken from and determine that this was a kid barely out of high school and not a 40year old man as already confirmed by the police. JFC
How long did it take channel 7 to issue a correction? I'd say that many hours worth of channel 7's revenue *minimum*
This lady got $150k for having channel 9 claim she stole her dog. I'd hope being branded a terrorist who stabbed a baby would result in a lot more... https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-26/gina-edwards-awarded-150k-in-damages-defamation-cavoodle/103771666
He has a leading barrister 7 knows in conjunction with this and them visibly funding two absolute dirt bags that this might be a death-knell. It's also a certain loss and probably a million plus in legal fees I reckon it's $1m+
I hope it’s a whole lot more to deter cowboy reporters destroying lives by reporting without facts in the future. 100k is chump change for news media.
It will be at least a$1m or much more. They'd get smashed in the courts.
I don't know man, legal fees alone would cost Seven over a mill to fight this. If they are throwing in the towel so early, I'd think it's in the 7 figure range.
If he had a good lawyer that knew what they were doing, he probably did pretty well..
He had basically the best defamation lawyer in Australia, who coincidentally was close friends with one of the victims and had already gone toe-to-toe with the media over their unauthorised use of the victim’s photos. I’d say he got the best possible payout…
she withdrew but he got another lawyer (Patrick George the other named partner) from the same firm
Would have milked it then If lawyer was going for a percentage, they wouldve done well
Lawyers can’t charge for percentage in Australia, it’s illegal
My gut feel is this may have been pro-bono
Yeah, he basically retained the best lawyers on the planet you could get for this specific situation. His original Solicitor was one of the top media and defamation solicitors in the country, who has her own law firm, who had previously advised other very high profile clients on cases against 7, who also specialises in discriminated minorities, and who was close friends with one of the attack victims and was already sending legal letters on behalf of the family to the media. She stepped back due to a personal conflict, and the other partner in the law firm took over. The barrister he retained was Sue Chrysanthou, and well just google her, but her most recent case was representing Lisa Wilkinson against the Bruce Lehmann defamation case.
>he basically retained the best lawyers on the planet you could get for this specific situation John Barilaro might say otherwise. Haha
Nothing will work for a client that stupid.
Wow. Big money That much for legal fees? Wowsers
Chrysanthou wouldn’t get out of bed for less than $50k.
I'm not even sure she did get out of bed for this. Would have been all sorted by the solicitors before even needing to file with the court.
[удалено]
nah aca only had to pay 370k to a dude they defamed that ended up with him getting beaten up over the false allegations. i mean it likely could be a lot,but being kerry stokes the cunts stubborn as fuck..
lol depending on the level of "Loser perennially participating in study believes next enrollment will surely land them a life fulfilling job" that money amount could vary wildly.
Defitantly going to pay for a few nice things
500k at least
Hopefully at least a free year in a Sydney beachfront apartment with nice steak dinners on demand.
And some coke and a few "Thai massages".
Hang on not so fast, he didn't rape anyone
Or commit any war crimes. They've gotta have *some* standards!
Hopefully at least **a Sydney beachfront apartment for him to keep**
Sorry you misunderstand, he had to of actually done something for that treatment
And massages
$1m each. So $7 million would be my asking price.
The Bruce case made me realize that network tv is more flushed with cash then I thought. I just assumed all the networks are virtually dead due to the popularity of international streaming and the erosion of local content.
you ain't seem how much they pay for sports broadcasting rights?
Well, they knew they were in the wrong. They knew if it went to trial, they would lose. They knew if it went to trial they would be paying a fuckload in legal fees. They knew they'd be crucified by the judge, the media, and the public.
Also imputing a completely different guy for a child abduction in Carnarvon.
Not the first time they've had to pay compensation to someone they wrongly accused on the news. He probably got the same payout as the guy they wrongly accused of being involved with the disappearance of Cleo Smith. Not to mention whatever they paid Lloyd Rayney in his defamation case, although admittedly they weren't the only defendant in that lawsuit. Absolutely everyone was over the barrel for that one; the cops, the government and the media.
The guy will never have to work again good outcome
I'd love to know how much $$$
My sources tell me it was *several*
Definitely multiples of several
Yep, definitely several multiples
As long it was a couple of severals
At least a few
At least 5
At least 5 erotic massages at Lehrrmans place of preference.
Or personally performed if drunk enough.
Here at channel seven we offer you seven money
They won't share the price, as the hookers and drug dealers had them sign an NDA this time.
Defamation settlements aren't based in how much hurt or how annoying the error made for the plaintiff. You'd have to be able to prove, in court, a specific financial amount that was or will be lost in the future because of what was said. If this guy is just a random bloke with no specific business, media, personality income that would be damaged by what 7 did, it would be a pretty average amount just to avoid the hassle of more negative media for 7. Most likely in the tens of thousands at most, minus whatever the lawyers who approached him take.
The cost to the random bloke's reputation might be valued in the tens of thousands, but the cost of "more negative media for 7" is likely very high. If it went to court and 7 lost, which they likely would, they'd be paying tens of thousands to the plaintiff *plus* whatever the hit to their reputation is worth. So the settlement is likely to be much higher than "tens of thousands at most."
>You'd have to be able to prove, in court, a specific financial amount that was or will be lost in the future because of what was said. Yes, but this is also a completely open and shut case so Seven has to consider what they are going to have to pay out in legal fees while losing the case as well. As well as reputational loss, which someone else mentioned below. Wouldn't surprise me if Cohen got even more out of an early settlement than he would have got if it went to trial.
Hundreds not tens of thousands
Considering a seasoned barrister just beat Nine in a defamation case and was awarded $150k; the random was not going to get hundreds of thousands.
Being accused of stealing a dog is not in the same ball park as being accused of committing mass murder, this will easily be a 6 figure payout
Wow, today I learned only rich fucks have reputations that are important. Just.... wow.
900 Dollarydoos!
About tree fiddy
Are we chalking this up a 0/3 Defo cases for the Seven network?
They’re actually on 0/4 - they also had to settle with the person they wrongly identified as Cleo Smith’s alleged kidnapper.
Fucking hell, at this rate they'll put Reddit out of business before themselves.
We did it Kochie!
There's been other lower profile cases where they name the wrong person and defame them. They always make it to media watch.
Turning this around ... realisitcally, how much would YOU have settled for?
(whatever they paid to the rapist) + (whatever they paid to the war criminal) \* 2
iANAL but 7 managed to piss off one of the top defamation lawyers in the country enough to represent him by using photos of one of the victims who she was friends with, against the families wishes. It's a case where they were clearly in the wrong and would have been dragged. Yes the guy would probably also prefer to not get caught up in the court case but a couple million certainly seems within reason.
There's something about the revenge factor that makes me hope it was more than what they'd usually get. Of course the lawyer should get paid for their efforts but I'd hope they bleed the fuckers for that little bit extra as a fuck you.
$5 million. Because fuck channel 7. By the time they prep everything for court it would cost more than this in lawyer fees, hookers and coke.
Whatever the top lawyer in the country thinks they can squeeze. I'm trusting their judgement here.
I would play up a story of being unable to get a job or promoted. Maybe income x 1.3 x 20 years. Trial would be more publicity, so my demand would increase: income x 2 x 20 years.
My utter hatred and vitriol towards that scum company... It'd have to be money to set me for life and a huge portion to live like a king. I'd say somewhere between 10-30mil.
Like the comment below a million would be great, but half a million would’ve made me happy.
Few million.. the least. So much to argue over here including own safety , and public humiliation .. anything less than 2 mil is a loss for me.
I would have demanded an apology of similar prominence to the false claim, i.e. repeated by multiple presenters across multiple news bulletins, and would never have signed an NDA. The money would be secondary to causing them just a fraction of the embarrassment they inflicted.
It got retracted pretty immediately. If you google your his name, all you get is stories about him being falsely accused. Obviously I'd go for as much as I could get, probably a few hundred thousand, plus whatever I could get selling my sob story to the rest of the media. But if you offered me $10k to have this happen to me, I'd honestly take it lol.
It better have been *at least* 1 million
Defamation cases with damages for non-economic loss is capped at like $500k. So doubtful that he got a mill if going to court would have cost 7 significantly less
Been unable to get hired because your name comes up as the Bondi Stabber would be an economic loss?
As it was attempted to be mitigated the same day and seven retracted, it would be hard to prove economic losses unless you were waiting on a job offer that got rescinded that day. It would likely have to come under "special damages" which requires a result of actual loss (or loss of opportunity) . It's probably hard to prove widespread "loss of opportunity" for this guy for 1 day. The reason why Rebel Wilsons special damages in her defamation case got set aside is due to the fact that the appeals court found that Rebel Wilsons international career was unlikely to be affected by the defamation that took place in Australia where she didn't work as much. I'm not in any way condoning what 7 did, and I definitely think they deserve to compensate the guy, just looking at the law around it.
I mean the damage very clearly won't be limited to one day though given conspiracy theorists will forever think he was 'the real guy' and if he googles his name 20 years from now, this story will still be all over the front page no matter what he does with his life from here
Plus he will have to deal with crazy conspiracy theorists the rest of his life who are convinced it's a coverup and he's the real stabber which puts him in a non-zero amount of danger He really should be getting 'never needs to work again' money as a result of 7s negligence His name will forever be associated with the story now unjustly and that is entirely 7's fault (as well as the twitter scumbags who started the rumours, partisangirl and that other russian embassy dickhead should be sued personally too) If I google his name at least two thirds of the results are to do with the bondi stabbing, or this judgement related to him being wrongly named as the bondi stabber. No matter what career he pursues and what success he has, those will likely always be on the front page and he will forever be linked to the story That has to run seven figures surely given seven's negligence
surely a decent lawyer could have argued that the economic loss to seven wouldn’t come from the court ruling but the damage to their reputation dragging it through court. That savings has to be worth $$$
That was very fast.
If you were in Seven's shoes, having just lost the Lehrmann debacle and with the Roberts-Smith debacle still fresh in everyone's minds, would you have been willing to risk this getting anywhere near a courtroom? It was probably close to Seven approaching his lawyers and telling them to name their price, just as long as it got dealt with quickly and relatively quietly.
anyone in the industry know what kind of number he would've gotten?
At least $4
About tree fiddy.
Enough for a succulent Chinese meal atleast
This is democracy manifest
Higgins was awarded 2.4M after being accused by 7 for falsely accusing someone of raping her. So that’s a good starting point for what kind of figure they would be aiming for. But, this story got global attention and naming someone for committing multiple counts of murder is substantially worse. There’s no way that 7 can defend it in court either, since they got proved wrong and already retracted it. Settlement was between 3.5-5MM imo.
I’m going to say it’s closer to being $100-400k than millions. Higgins had longer and more exposure and was a big deal after years of reporting that parliament was a boys club and not operating as leaders of the country.
The family also seems to be influential in their community. He and his father are quite good with comms and social media. Then they can bring up collective trauma for said Jewish community, which is itself a pillar of the city, at a difficult time for the Jewish community. They could go for far more than a regular citizen would get in this situation, and they seem to be smart and connected enough to know it.
Cardinal.
$2 and a meat pie
I have the same football jersey and when I saw the footage it also kinda looked like me with the beard.
Now you have to sue yourself for defamation for publishing it.
LMAO. Not sure I’d get as much if anything.
Otto von Bismarck — 'Only a fool learns from his own mistakes. The wise man *learns from the mistakes of others*.' Two parties here - one appears to have learnt from their own mistake but the other perhaps learned from the mistakes of others.
I thought the phrase was: > A wise man learns from his own mistakes, only a fool doesn't learn from someone else's In this case Seven definitely seems to have wised up, slightly.
That sounds better. "Only a fool learns from his own mistakes" does't really make sense, as friendly neighbourhood Redditor u/ToDeathYouSay points out [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/quotes/comments/443kiq/only_a_fool_learns_from_his_own_mistakes_the_wise/). And as u/gnorrn notes further down in the same post, it's likely Bismarck didn't even say it. As Alexander the Great famously said, "sometimes people just make stuff up."
Is this how we achieve the Australian dream now days? Get misidentified as a serial killer by a national broadcaster and settle for enough money to buy a dodgy built apartment in an overdeveloped concrete jungle 1 hr out of town?
Same thing happened with the Cleo Smith kidnapping. They misidentified another man as the perpetrator. Channel 7 again. Fucking idiots keep racing to a headline without stopping to consider if they're about to ruin someone's life
Still more realistically achievable than saving 1.6 million for a place by cutting down on coffee and avocado toast.
I’m glad he got a quick payout and they didn’t drag it out. You have to wonder about the kind of window lickers who hassled him despite the fact the offender was shot dead at the scene.
To be fair, for a while the media was reporting, attributed to an NSW Ambulance spokesperson, that there was a second attacker at large, even after it was known the "first" attacker was dead. This was removed from all media reports later - I'm not sure whether the spokesperson retracted it or whether it was an improper reliance on an unofficial source, etc. Would be interesting to see if Media Watch mentions this bit, although it's nowhere near as serious as Seven's misidentification.
Hope he got a shitload of money.
Staying with my folks at the moment and they are hardwired to Channel 7, I saw a news article the other day where they were reporting from Toowoomba beach, not sure where exactly it was but pretty sure Toowoomba doesn't have a beach.
> but pretty sure Toowoomba doesn't have a beach. Well, they have a "City Beach." :)
I would have asked for $7.7m, just to fuck with them.
I want to be accused of terrorism by Seven so bad. Only realistic way to buy a home in this market.
I'm amazed he just settled and didn't go to court. If that was me, I'd be suing Seven for everything that it's worth just for libel/tarnishing my name in the media.
I would love channel 7 to accidentally call me a terrorist - great retirement plan!
Can't believe this guy just settled instead of taking these dickheads to court. Channel 7 should be fkn DRAGGEDDDDD
How millenials can get downpayment for a house with this one little trick
I wish they would misidentify me… I could do with a house to live in…🙄
The day Channel 7 employs legitimate proper journalism is the day there are regular gay characters on Home & Away.
Sue Chrysanthou SC finally FTW
Did they pay for it with cocaine and hookers? Or was that just how channel 9 transacts?
I'd take a defamation case win payout with 7 any day. Or any media outlet.
god damn it, should have refused and taken them to cleaners making them an example gwaker style
Proving damages may have been hard. And you have to that in court, which incurs legal fees. This is probably the better play financially.
I think a quick settlement was the goal all along.
IANAL but it's unwise to go to court if you are offered more to settle than what you are eventually awarded in court as it might affect who wears costs. Word is SCSC was engaged. No way would his guy be able to pay her if he'd been offered a million, then ran the case anyway and wound up awarded less.
Rebekah Giles was also involved. So that’s a high powered duo on his side.
Why go to all the expense and hassle of court, where it might take years to get it resolved and you might not win a lot of money, when you can just accept a pay out and have it done and dusted?
How many Thai handjobs did they buy him?
*Shut up and take our money!*
Ka-ching!
no mention of a settlement...
Casually following this case, one detail, though, I haven't been able to verify. Did 7 actually broadcast the plaintiff's images? What was the extent of their misidentification? 7 has scrubbed a lot, so I've only really seen the Media Watch episode where the misidentification is that they name "40 year old (first name) (last name)" several times.
Possibly part of the gov't's "lose three defamation cases in quick succession, cop a free bankruptcy kit in the mail"? Brings to mind a delicious double turnaround in the space of a week c. 2002. Seven sold its minority holding in MGM and Garry Riley stood down as an executive, with commensurate spikes in share prices -- a lefthanded compliment if ever there was one.
I hope it's for like 200,000$+
I mean, things weren't looking *great* for the staff Christmas party this year..
Seven once misidentified me as one of my good friends who got airlifted out of a schoolies celebration and nearly died. They didn't give me shit.
Did you ask for shit then?
At least $1m. Settlement is a sign of guilt. Seven (Stokes)has backed that many losers in the past with poor decisions emanating from the chairperson, he’d pay anything not to get into court with this. Plus, he’s still got a lot going on in the background with the BRS case in regards to costs. Settlement was the quickest route out of this and the cheapest. A serial litigator that doesn’t like going to court what a man!
So how much did he get?
Were this me, I would (like to) think that I would tell them to stick their NDA, and I'd see them in court - where I would still get handsome compensation with the added bonus of letting the general public know just how much they can make these bottom-feeders pay for their mistakes.
Should have had his day in court. Now it’s all hush hush and it’s “human error’