Page 1 of 1

Banned Fan Sues Jazz, Russell Westbrook For $100 Million Worth Of Damages

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 6:36 am
by RealGM Wiretap

Shane Keisel, who received a lifetime ban from all Vivant Smart Home Arena events last March, filed a lawsuit against the Utah Jazz and Russell Westbrook claiming he was wrongly accused of shouting racist and derogatory terms against the current Rockets player.


“Mr. Keisel’s heckling was of the same kind and caliber as that of the other audience members in the section,” the lawsuit claims.


Keisel received the lifetime ban after video circulated of Westbrook shouting at Keisel and his girlfriend Jennifer Huff.


Westbrook said that Keisel shouted racist comments towards him during the game, with Keisel telling Westbrook to "get down on your knees like you used to." 


The lawsuit claims that Westbrook misheard or mischaracterized Keisel's comments. 


Keisel, who was fired from his job, claims that he and his family members were harassed following the incident. 


Attorneys are seeking $68 million for Keisel and $38 million for Huff.

Via Benjamin Wood & Andy Larsen/The Salt Lake Tribune


Re: Banned Fan Sues Jazz, Russell Westbrook For $100 Million Worth Of Damages

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:53 am
by Ticket
AMERICA

Re: Banned Fan Sues Jazz, Russell Westbrook For $100 Million Worth Of Damages

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:19 pm
by Wreckonized
Here is a guy stupid enough to be racist managing to make himself look even more stupid. Brilliant

Re: Banned Fan Sues Jazz, Russell Westbrook For $100 Million Worth Of Damages

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:21 pm
by Def Leppard
Tort Reform is a word I know, it something to do with legal stuff. Enjoy this post

Sent from my BBE100-5 using RealGM mobile app

Re: Banned Fan Sues Jazz, Russell Westbrook For $100 Million Worth Of Damages

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 4:50 pm
by GQ Hot Dog
Smollett, Garrett...Westbrook? Is there a trend here of the privileged upper middle-class feeling entitled to use the color of there skin(or sexuality, gender, etc.) as a weapon to smear those they feel slighted by or as a tool to leverage more money? Yeah, that's a trend.

If there's no documentary proof of it and if the individuals around him can't corroborate it then go get your money son.

Re: Banned Fan Sues Jazz, Russell Westbrook For $100 Million Worth Of Damages

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 5:12 pm
by agiaco
What an idiot.

Re: Banned Fan Sues Jazz, Russell Westbrook For $100 Million Worth Of Damages

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 5:44 pm
by Ksrbot
thinkingwarriors wrote:Smollett, Garrett...Westbrook? Is there a trend here of the privileged upper middle-class feeling entitled to use the color of there skin(or sexuality, gender, etc.) as a weapon to smear those they feel slighted by or as a tool to leverage more money? Yeah, that's a trend.

If there's no documentary proof of it and if the individuals around him can't corroborate it then go get your money son.


Privileged? I'm sorry, what? Why would WB use this situation to leverage more money? From who? Nobody was hung up on this until this redneck sued him. WB has nothing to gain here. And if you had a ounce of common sense, you'd understand that this kind of attention doesn't further anybody's platform. Stop playing devils advocate in clear situations. Kyle Korver literally wrote a later to Utah after this. And you still think those damn "colored people" are lying.

Re: Banned Fan Sues Jazz, Russell Westbrook For $100 Million Worth Of Damages

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:44 pm
by Pickled Prunes
I love the way this guy thinks!

"The derogatory comments my girlfriend and I were shouting were similar the things people around us were shouting. We, as a group, were all shouting at an individual... and he had the nerve to shout back at me personally. It hurt my feelings. He should give me money."

This guys parents must be proud!

Re: Banned Fan Sues Jazz, Russell Westbrook For $100 Million Worth Of Damages

Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:39 am
by GQ Hot Dog
Ksrbot wrote:
thinkingwarriors wrote:Smollett, Garrett...Westbrook? Is there a trend here of the privileged upper middle-class feeling entitled to use the color of there skin(or sexuality, gender, etc.) as a weapon to smear those they feel slighted by or as a tool to leverage more money? Yeah, that's a trend.

If there's no documentary proof of it and if the individuals around him can't corroborate it then go get your money son.


Privileged? I'm sorry, what? Why would WB use this situation to leverage more money? From who? Nobody was hung up on this until this redneck sued him. WB has nothing to gain here. And if you had a ounce of common sense, you'd understand that this kind of attention doesn't further anybody's platform. Stop playing devils advocate in clear situations. Kyle Korver literally wrote a later to Utah after this. And you still think those damn "colored people" are lying.


I clearly said, "as a weapon to smear those they feel slighted by", in this case it's not about money.

And hell yes Westbrook is privileged, possessing all the privilege that is bestowed upon someone make $38 million dollars this year.

"Redneck"? Your own use of racial epithets exposes your own racist inclinations. If Westbrook was white accusing a black individual of the same thing would you be saying "this n-word sued him"?

As I said before, if there's no audio of him saying it, if all the many fans around him, in a better position to hear what he said than Westbrook, can't corroborate the claims, then he should sue the hell out of Westbrook and the Jazz for vicious slander. If you accuse someone of racism, in this day and age when someone can lose their job or worse for such an accusation, you better bring some proof.

I take the presumption of innocence very seriously, as I do all the democratic rights our ancestors fought and died for. If this person was banned from Jazz games for life because of an allegation that can't be corroborated he has been wronged and he deserves to be made whole. Whether that's money or a public apology from the Jazz organization and rescinding the ban should be up to the parties involved or a lawful arbitrator.