Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="fanfanclubclub, post: 84173, member: 787"] Hmm, maybe. But if you [URL='http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=bernie+fine&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=231l1832l0l2487l11l8l0l0l0l0l196l1120l0.8l8l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1366&bih=643&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi']run a google search for Bernie Fine[/URL], this is the only picture with young boys in it. I could not find any other pictures with Fine and multiple boys, and this picture has it all: *Bernie *young boys * suggestive facial expression * JB's back turned I think it is extremely unlikely that ESPN chose this picture for any other reason than the prejudice. Typically, a national photo of Fine would include JB's face, since that is who Bernie Fine is to the nation: JB's assistant. It's pretty conspicuous that they went with this boys/smirk/eyebrow photo. As an attorney with some experience in defamation, I feel that this picture would be admissible with respect to malice and damages. [/QUOTE]