Dixie Chicks accused of libel
 

Natalie Maines, Fellow Dixie Chicks Courted for Libel
Buzz UpSendSharePrint
Natalie Finn – Fri Dec 5, 11:09 am ET

E! Online – Natalie Maines, Fellow Dixie Chicks Courted for Libel(E! Online)
Los Angeles (E! Online) – Another Dixie Chicks cause, another angry reaction.
A man whose 8-year-old stepson was killed in 1993 has sued all three members of the country-pop group for defamation, singling out frontwoman Natalie Maines for her comments suggesting he played a role in the boy's death.
Maines, whose outspokenness has won her lifelong friends and mortal enemies alike, appeared last December at a rally in Little Rock, Ark., for the three men, tagged the "West Memphis Three" by their supporters, who were convicted as teenagers of killing the plaintiff's stepson, Steve Branch, and two other 8-year-old boys.
According to the six-page complaint filed Nov. 25 in Pulaski County Circuit Court, the "Not Ready to Make Nice" singer told the crowd that new DNA evidence from the crime scene implicated Steve's stepdad, Terry Hobbs, and that Hobbs' behavior following the boys' deaths was suspect.
Her comments resemble those written in a letter about the case posted on the Dixie Chicks' website and obtained by various media outlets, including People, the Huffington Post, FreeRepublic.com and ABC News.
Maines' statements were "so extreme in degree as to be beyond the pale of decency and to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in civilized society," Hobbs' lawsuit states, per the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.
"Defendant's repeated libelous publications concerning the involvement of the plaintiff in the murders of Steve Branch, Christopher Byers and Michael Moore were not based on fact and, in fact, were false and reckless at the time of publication."
Hobbs is alleging defamation, libel, intentional infliction of emotional distress by outrageous conduct and false-light invasion of privacy. He is seeking unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, claiming the Chicks caused him embarrassment, humiliation, "severe" psychological and emotional trauma, loss of income and injury to his reputation.
"I want people to know I haven't done nothing wrong," Hobbs told the Democrat-Gazette in February. "I want them to hear it from me."
"It shames you, something like this. That's the biggest thing I've had to deal with—shame."
A publicist for the Dixie Chicks didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
In September, a Craighead County Circuit Court judge denied new trials for two of the three convicted men, ruling that the new forensic evidence didn't provide "reasonable probability" that the pair were innocent.
·

I wonder what made her chose this cause?

Who knows?

The defamation law suit may sort it all out. But more likely it will be settled out of court and a perfunctory statement will be issued declaring every body to be sorry that they were misunderstood.

IMHO she should have kept quiet....but you don't know what she has seen. Perhaps you would be persuaded also to take a stand if you were a person who folks would listen to when you issued a statement for the press.

waiting for JD or Benz-LGB to chime in....

TO HOLLYWOOD, NASHVILLE, and all other STAR HANGOUTS:

SHUT UP AND SING!

NOBODY WANTS TO HEAR YOUR OPINIONS AND HAVING A GOLD RECORD DOES NOT MAKE YOU A POLITICAL PUNDIT

In Natalie's case maybe another round of canceled tour dates and sponsors dropping her is in order.

I try never to put libels on other people . . . .

Being virtually unknown, I feel free to spout off my opinions all the time. I feel uniquely qualified in that respect to pass judgement on most things . . . .:D

I'm sorry but Natalie Maines is a complete bee-otch... :rolleyes:

Why is Natalie Maines, or Tom Selleck's opinion any less valid than George Will or Pat Buchanans? If you do not like their opinion then change the channel or do not purchase their stuff. I do not watch any Tom Cruse or Mel Gibson stuff any more.

I fail to understand why they should not voice their opinions just like anyone else.

I think maybe it's because so many celebrities sound like airheads.

I'm thinking of people like Tom Cruise, for instance . . . .

EVERYONE is certainly entitled to their opinion. It's just the delivery of the opinion that stinks... There's only a certain degree of passion that someone can display before they start looking like an idiot.

The difference between Natalie or Tom and myself is that they get their opinions published like it is the gospel. I do not. The difference between them and George Will is that George Will actually has something to say. Notice I did not say that for Pat Bigmouth. Free speech is a great thing, but who wants to elevate these people to the role of public conscience or public spokesman.

It all reminds me of the scene in "TEAM AMERICA" where Janine Garafalo
says" We have to read the NY Times and spout the opinins as if they are our own"

Left, Right, or Center, what the people who made them famous made them famous for is their talent, not their political agenda.

Wayne Newton was right when he cancelled Linda Ronstadt's concerts at his place in Las Vegas after she shot off her mouth (and the audience walked out)

Th paraphrase Husky,they are simply entertainers,not oracles of socio-political brilliance.

But then most so-called pundits are just about on par with successful lounge acts.

I think we need a balanced opinion for each publicly expressed opinion in the media. I propose a federal law, since opinions cross state lines. It will need an enforcement section to monitor the media and provide balanced speakers.

B