Armenta Family Sues Deadspin For Blackface Story
Armenta Family Sues Deadspin For Blackface Story
Armenta Family Sues Deadspin For Blackface Story
Transaction ID 71960397
Case No. N24C-02-051 SPL
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
love by attending the Chiefs-Raiders NFL football game wearing a Chiefs jersey
and necklace, his face painted half-red and half-black, and a costume headdress—
just as Chiefs fans and other avid sports fans have done for decades.
2. During the CBS television broadcast, H.A. was shown for three
seconds, where the audience can clearly see his red-and-black face paint.
Together, they represented fervent fans with their faces painted for game-day battle,
3. Those few seconds provided just the opportunity for Deadspin Senior
Writer Carron Phillips to, on behalf of himself and his employer Deadspin,
maliciously and wantonly attack a nine-year-old boy and his parents for Phillips’
broadcast an image of H.A. showing only the one side of his face with black paint
on it—an effort that took laser-focused precision to accomplish given how quickly
the boy appeared on screen—Phillips and Deadspin deliberately omitted the half of
2
published by Deadspin, entitled “The NFL needs to speak out against the Kansas
5. The Article falsely alleged that H.A. had “found a way to hate Black
people and the Native Americans at the same time.” It alleged that H.A.’s parents,
Shannon and Raul, “taught” H.A. “racism and hate” at home. It intentionally painted
proudly engaged in the worst kind of racist conduct motivated by their family’s
3
6. The problem with Phillips’ Article: literally none of it was true. H.A.
did not wear blackface. “Blackface” is “dark makeup worn to mimic the appearance
of a Black person and especially to mock or ridicule Black people.”1 Before this
controversy, nine-year-old H.A. had no idea what blackface was or the racist history
behind it. And he certainly did not wear black paint on half of his face to mimic or
mock Black people. He is a child, and until Deadspin and Phillips’ malicious
accusation, it never occurred to nine-year-old H.A. that a person could hate another
for the color of their skin. The truth is that H.A.’s face was painted in Chiefs’ team
colors, black and red, split down the middle—just as myriad fans and team regalia
H.A.’s parents, Raul and Shannon Armenta, did not teach H.A. to hate Native
Americans at home. H.A.’s father, Raul, belongs to the Santa Ynez Band of
Chumash Indians, and he works on the tribal reservation. And H.A.’s grandfather
was a tribal elder. Throughout his childhood, H.A.’s parents have taught H.A. and
his siblings the proud heritage, culture, and traditions of their tribe—and they
celebrate that culture and history proudly. H.A. did not wear a costume headdress
because he was “taught hate at home”—he wore it because he loves the Kansas City
1
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/blackface.
4
Chiefs’ football team and because he loves his Native American heritage.
account on the social media site X (formerly Twitter) was flooded with comments
showing H.A.’s full face. At 11:51 AM, H.A.’s mother, Shannon, posted on
Facebook that H.A. was Native American and pleaded with Deadspin to “just stop
9. Deadspin and Phillips saw all this. The day the Article was published,
they acknowledged that they had seen H.A.’s full face, yet they intentionally elected
not to do anything to mitigate the damage done. Instead, Phillips took to X to call
misleading update (the “Republication”) that doubled down and further defamed the
11. Over the next two weeks, the Armenta Family repeatedly wrote to
Deadspin demanding that it retract the Article and apologize to the Armenta Family.
5
Deadspin did not retract the Article, and it did not apologize. Rather, it published a
series of further “updates” that not only failed to correct the record, but instead
established that Deadspin fully understood the Article’s highly damaging and
lawyers threatened the Armenta family with counter-legal action should Raul and
Shannon attempt to hold Phillips and Deadspin accountable for their false and
defamatory Article.
12. Deadspin’s lies have caused the Armenta Family enormous damage.
They have exposed the family to a barrage of hate, including death threats (“I’m
going to kill [H.A.] with a wood chipper”) and insults (calling H.A. a “p-ssy,” a
“mother fucker,” and a “n-gg-r”). They have made Raul a pariah at work, forcing
the family to consider moving out of state. And they have branded a nine-year-old
child with false allegations that will live forever online. H.A. has already suffered
significantly—his test scores and grades have dropped in school, and he has shown
13. Deadspin has gone too far. H.A. should not have to live with his face
being plastered on social media alongside false and defamatory accusations of racist
conduct. His parents should not be forced to live with the false and defamatory
allegation that they are teaching “hate in the home.” And Raul and Shannon will
6
rights—and the rights of their nine-year old son. The Armenta Family brings this
lawsuit to set the record straight and to hold Deadspin accountable for willfully
spreading incendiary lies about a nine-year-old child who it chose as a vehicle for
14. Plaintiff H.A. is a nine-year-old minor who lives with his parents Raul
15. Plaintiff Raul Armenta Jr. is H.A.’s father, and he is a member of the
He is a Project Manager for the tribe and serves on the tribe’s Powwow Committee.
His father is Raul Armenta, a tribal leader serving his fifth consecutive two-year
term on the tribe’s Business Committee, and his grandfather was Manual Armenta,
a tribal elder who passed away in 2012. Raul Jr. is a resident and domiciliary of
California.
domiciliary of California.
York and incorporated in Delaware that operates Deadspin, a sports blog, as one of
its brands. G/O Media describes itself as “a premium digital publishing company
7
and rabidly passionate,” and claims that its sites “boast enviable engagement
metrics.”
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
Phillips Meticulously Screen Captures and Edits a Photo from a CBS Football
Broadcast to Smear Nine-Year-Old H.A. as Wearing Blackface, Falsely
Claiming H.A. Hates Black People
19. On November 26, 2023, H.A.’s parents Shannon and Raul took him to
a Chiefs vs. Raiders game in Las Vegas, where they sat in the front row. H.A. wore
a Chiefs headdress, a Chiefs jersey, and a Chiefs necklace that players could sign.
Before the game, Raul helped him paint his face in Chiefs colors: the right side was
jet black, and the left was red, split evenly down the middle.2
20. Although the Chiefs’ official colors are red, gold and white, many
Chiefs fans wear red and black to the team’s games as a show of support. Taylor
Swift is one prominent example, recently wearing red and black to support her
boyfriend, Chiefs tight end, Travis Kelce. Another prominent example: the Chiefs’
Super Bowl LVII jersey is black, with red and gold numbering:
2
The Chiefs’ official colors are red, gold and white, although black is featured
commonly and prominently by Chiefs fans, and used as the outline around the
“arrowhead” on Chiefs helmets.
8
21. Before the game, H.A. made team gestures at the players, and was
delighted when players repeated those gestures back at him. Even the Raiders’ own
smiling and beaming at the nine-year-old boy and his team spirit:
9
22. Black face paint is also a common component of many NFL fans’
10
23. A CBS broadcast of the Chiefs vs. Raiders game showed H.A. for
approximately three seconds. H.A.’s red-and-black face was fully visible in the
broadcast. Carron Phillips, a Senior Writer for Deadspin, saw the broadcast, homed
in on a split second where only the black side of the face paint was visible, and
smelled an opportunity.
isolated and screen-captured one frame in the clip to make it look like H.A. was
wearing only black face paint. He then used that image (“the Misleading Picture”)
as the foundation of the false and defamatory Article that caused tremendous damage
to H.A. and his family—creating a huge controversy where none existed, driving
Misleading Picture is front-and-center; it shows H.A. from a side angle, making his
11
whole face look black. Its caption gives credit to CBS for Deadspin’s screenshot of
26. Accusing people of engaging in racist acts has long been Phillips’
modus operandi; his career is based on it. His recent articles include: “Ryan
“We know why Simone Biles doesn’t get the same attention as Taylor Swift at NFL
games” (because she is Black),4 and “The Chicago Bears haven’t won a playoff
3
Carron J. Phillips, Ryan Tannehill’s ‘support’ for young Titans quarterbacks
depends on if they’re white, Deadspin (Nov. 13, 2023), https://deadspin.com/ryan-
tannehill-will-levis-mailk-willis-nfl-titans-1851016916.
4
Carron J. Phillips, We know why Simone Biles doesn’t get the same attention as
Taylor Swift at NFL games (the subheading labels Taylor Swift “America’s white
sweetheart.”), Deadspin (Nov. 3, 2023), https://deadspin.com/nfl-taylor-swift-
simone-biles-travis-kelce-chiefs-1850989654.
12
game since Lovie Smith. Their next head coach should be Black.”5 He has declared
to the public that “America is racist as hell”6 and has authored dozens of articles to
support this inflammatory narrative. Phillips has also declared that he and other
people of color are “tired of going high”—taking the high road—because “[a]lways
having to be the bigger person is not only unfair but extremely exhausting.”7 Instead
of “going high,” Phillips would take out his racist “exhaustion” on a child and his
family.
27. Deadspin and Phillips never thought that H.A. was actually wearing
blackface. But Deadspin does, after all, employ Phillips—someone who makes his
livelihood through vicious race-baiting—and they each hoped to gain notoriety with
this entirely false but inflammatory accusation. More important for Deadspin was
5
Carron J. Phillips, The Chicago Bears haven’t won a playoff game since Lovie
Smith. Their next head coach should be Black, Deadspin (Oct. 2, 2023),
https://deadspin.com/matt-eberflus-chicago-bears-black-head-coaches-lovie-
1850891810?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter.
6
Carron J. Phillips, Why what happened in Charlottesville over weekend was the
most American part of 2017, NY Post (Aug. 14, 2017, 12:58 P.M.)
https://www.nydailynews.com/2017/08/14/why-what-happened-in-charlottesville-
over-weekend-was-the-most-american-part-of-2017/.
7
Carron J. Phillips, A black teenage wrestler with dreads, a racist referee, and the
importance of how the media needs to handle sensitive subjects, NY Daily News
(Dec. 21, 2018, 5:20 P.M), https://www.nydailynews.com/2018/12/21/a-black-
teenage-wrestler-with-dreads-a-racist-referee-and-the-importance-of-how-the-
media-needs-to-handle-sensitive-subjects/.
13
revenue to prop up its ailing business.
cowardice.”8 The first widely known blackface character was “Jim Crow,” who
came to be the namesake for laws that enforced racial segregation across the United
States. The wearing of blackface by performers has become synonymous with the
29. Even the mere association with blackface can have devastating effects
professor was forced to resign after showing students a 1965 version of Othello in
which Laurence Olivier performed in blackface. In 2018, news anchor Megyn Kelly
downplayed the harm associated with wearing black makeup as part of a Halloween
costume, which led to a national scandal and her being fired by NBC.9 Phillips, as
someone steeped in the language of racism, well understood the gravity—and the
8
National Museum of African American History & Culture, “Blackface: The Birth
of An American Stereotype.” https://nmaahc.si.edu/explore/stories/blackface-birth-
american-stereotype.
9
Lynn Elber and Mark Kennedy, NBC cancels Megyn Kelly’s show after blackface
controversy, AP News (Oct. 26, 2018, 4:39 P.M.),
https://apnews.com/article/a84a7250b109411591ed6b976be800a0.
14
Deadspin’s Defamatory Article Falsely Accuses H.A.’s
Parents of Teaching Hate in Their Home
30. The Article made a series of false factual assertions. It asserted that
H.A. was “in Black face”; that he was “doubling up on the racism”; and that “[o]n
Sunday afternoon in Las Vegas, [H.A.] found a way to hate Black people and the
31. The Article claimed that H.A.’s costume “was as if Jon Gruden’s emails
had come to life”—falsely implying that his outfit was comparable to disgraced
Raiders coach Jon Gruden’s history of shocking racist behavior, including an email
in which he remarked that the Black head of the NFL Players Association had “lips
32. The Article further made explicit, false statements about Shannon and
Raul. It claimed that H.A.’s conduct of wearing blackface and a Native American
headdress, and the NFL’s failure to “speak out against it,” indicated that the league
was failing “to stop racism and hate from being taught in the home”—a clear
accusation that Raul and Shannon taught H.A. to hate Black and Native American
people out of a racist animus. The Article also stated that “[t]his [H.A.] is what
happens when you ban books, stand against Critical Race Theory, and try to erase
10
Andrew Beaton, Jon Gruden Uses Racial Trope to Describe NFLPA Chief
DeMaurice Smith in 2011 Email, The Wall Street Journal (Oct. 8, 2021, 8:09 P.M.),
https://www.wsj.com/articles/jon-gruden-email-demaurice-smith-
11633721045?mod=e2tw.
15
centuries of hate. You give future generations [H.A.] the ammunition they need to
evolve and recreate racism better than before.” This line had a double purpose: it
further clarified Deadspin’s intent to accuse Shannon and Raul of teaching “hate …
in the home,” and implied that H.A.’s innocent costume was even worse than
America’s racist past, which includes slavery, Jim Crow laws, and lynching, by
33. Phillips’ accusation that H.A. engaged in racist conduct towards Blacks
and Native Americans—and that Shannon and Raul taught him to engage in that
conduct—is false and defamatory. H.A. was not wearing blackface, and thus
Deadspin’s allegations that he hates Black people, and that Shannon and Raul taught
him to do so, are false and entirely baseless. The Armentas are Native American,
and thus any claim that H.A. hates Native American people, or that Shannon and
Raul taught him to do so, are also false and defamatory. Rather, Shannon and Raul
taught H.A. to love and appreciate his heritage—and they immediately stated so
publicly.
posts proved Deadspin wrong on the fundamental underpinnings of the Article: H.A.
was not wearing blackface, and H.A. did not hate Native Americans because he is
Native American. H.A. was not engaging in a public display of racist conduct
16
towards Black and Native American people. Shannon and Raul had not “taught him”
to hate. Instead, he was an innocent child enjoying a football game dressed in team
its post with photos which showed that H.A. was simply wearing team colors.
Deadspin’s post would ultimately rack up more than 18,000 comments, which led X
to flag the post with a “community note” that clarified its falsity:
36. That day at 11:51 AM—about an hour after Deadspin published the
with the NFL. Also, CBS showed him multiple times and this is the photo people
17
chose to blast to create division. He is Native American – just stop already.”
Media outlets quickly confirmed that not only is H.A. Native American; his father
37. Others who initially spread the false allegations quickly apologized and
corrected the record. One sports reporter, Jack McGuire at Barstool Sports, did
exactly what Deadspin was obligated to do: acknowledged that he “messed up” by
reporting that H.A. was wearing blackface without inquiring into the full context.12
McGuire said: “[I]t has come out that [H.A.] is Native American,” “[h]is grandfather
is part of the Chumash Tribe, and a member of the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash
Indians. I have since taken down this TikTok, and the apology should be as loud as
The story is not as simple as just something on the TV, and as somebody who
38. That is what a decent person does when he gets swept up in the moment
11
The young Kansas City Chiefs fan Deadspin tried to cancel over false ‘black face’
and racism accusations is Native American, The Post Millennial (Nov. 28, 2023),
https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-the-young-kansas-city-chiefs-fan-deadspin-
tried-to-cancel-over-false-black-face-and-racism-accusations-is-native-
american#google_vignette.
12
Jack McGuire, I should’ve been better, TikTok (Nov. 29, 2023),
https://www.tiktok.com/@jackmacbarstool/video/7306914127589412138.
18
Deadspin and Phillips Refuse to Correct the Article and
Instead Double Down on Their False Narrative
39. On the afternoon of November 27, Phillips took the opposite approach
to McGuire by posting on X: “For the idiots in my mentions who are treating this as
some harmless act because the other side of his face was painted red, I could make
the argument that it makes it even worse. Y’all are the ones who hate Mexicans but
wear sombreros on Cinco.” The post linked to the Article, and the Misleading
Picture of H.A.’s face was visible in the embedded photo. At the time of this post,
Phillips had complete knowledge of the depth of the falsity of his claims.
40. For three days, the Article’s headline and defamatory first paragraph
19
November 30, Deadspin republished the Article with an “update” featuring a quote
from the Chumash Indian tribe Deadspin claimed supported its false narrative.
41. The update in the Republication read: The “Santa Ynez Band of
Chumash Indians, whom the fan and his family are affiliated with, have released
The tribe did not “condemn” H.A.’s costume; it clarified that it “does not endorse”
regalia in general, while acknowledging that H.A.’s headdress and face paint were
20
that the Article was false and defamatory, and demanding that Deadspin retract it
story while failing to fix it. In that update, Deadspin removed explicit references to
H.A. but maintained the focus on the story on “a young fan” who had allegedly
targeting of H.A. “unfortunate,” as its “intended focus was on the NFL and its
checkered history on race”—a backhanded and revisionist non-apology that left its
45. Deadspin then updated the story on December 12 a final time, making
only minor edits to scrub two explicit references to “racism” and one to “cultural
are not banned in “every stadium in the league”—a dishonest attempt to reframe the
gist of the original story. This second update only underscored Deadspin’s
subjective understanding that the Armentas’ demand was meritorious, and the
towards Black and Native American people, and that Shannon and Raul taught him
demand to Deadspin, that its half-hearted updates were unacceptable. That second
21
demand specified numerous false and defamatory statements that Deadspin was
obligated to retract.
Armentas belittling them and downplaying the harm they have suffered. Deadspin
denied all culpability, stated that its updates “mitigate[d] any damages,” and then
Deadspin falsely accused of wearing blackface and hating his own Native American
brethren—to “the possibility of paying our legal fees” should they elect to file a legal
48. That letter also falsely claimed that Deadspin’s update “fully addressed
of any kind. It was both equivocal and incomplete. No impartial reader would
49. Deadspin’s false claims have exposed the Armenta Family to a barrage
of hatred and ridicule. Below is just a sample of the vitriol directed at them after
22
50. The Armenta Family has also received dozens of hateful messages,
including death threats and unhinged harangues calling H.A. a “p-ssy,” a “mother
23
51. This has damaged the Armenta Family in many ways. First, the attacks
have damaged Raul Armenta’s relationships at work and caused the Armenta Family
and that H.A. is “devastated.” “The damage is already done,” he continued. “Now
there’s comments all over.”13 This was before the hate began in earnest.
52. Since November, Raul has experienced a stark change in the behavior
of his colleagues at work, colleagues who still have the misimpression that he has
taught his child to hate in his home. In the Native American community—a
community that has historically suffered from racial and cultural discrimination
itself—allegations that Raul has taught his son to hate Black people and allowed his
son to wear blackface are especially harmful. Raul was once a highly-respected
member of a close-knit team, and now is treated as an outcast. He has had to take
significant leave from work to deal with the cascading crises and has expended
significant funds to help H.A. navigate the harm. Raul has worried about his and his
family’s future in the Chumash Indian community and among his friends. These are
only some examples of the significant reputational and emotional harm resulting
13
Victor Nava, 9-year-old Chiefs fan branded a racist by Deadspin reporter admits
he’s ‘nervous’ about attention, dad says it’s ‘too late’ for apology, NY Post (Nov.
30, 2023, 12:07 A.M), https://nypost.com/2023/11/30/news/young-kansas-city-
chiefs-fan-labeled-a-racist-by-deadspin-reporter-holden-armenta-speaks-out-its-a-
little-scary/.
24
from the Article’s false attacks.
damage since Deadspin ignored her repeated pleas to stop “blast[ing] her family just
to create division.” Like Raul, many of Shannon’s friends and peers are in the tribal
community, where allegations of racist conduct directed toward other racial and
ethnic minorities are viewed with particular disdain. Because Deadspin falsely
accused her of teaching H.A. to hate Black people in her home and allowing H.A. to
wear blackface to a football game, many of her friends no longer speak to her on
social media and in public. Shannon has had to devote significant time to H.A.’s
emotional and social well-being after the attacks from the Article and had to confront
troubling incidents at H.A.’s school because of it. As only one example, Shannon
and Raul have signed H.A. up for sports activities far away from his community
because the Article poisoned H.A.’s relationships (and their relationships with the
parents of H.A.’s former friends). Shannon drives more than 80 miles round trip
twice a week to take H.A. to these distant activities. She has suffered significant
emotional strain and worries for her son’s and her family’s future. Again, these are
only some examples of the harm Shannon has suffered since Deadspin published the
Article.
54. Shannon and Raul, now outcast from their community, are considering
25
55. H.A., meanwhile, has greatly struggled in school due to the unwanted
and unwarranted attention from the Article. Last year, when he began third grade,
recommended an “intervention.” His classmates bully him, and some question his
Native American heritage. He has lost many friendships. He has begun seeing a
therapist. He and his parents have had to spent considerable time and suffered
considerable heartache trying to find new friends that are not infected with the
56. Most gravely, H.A. has suffered a devastating loss for a nine-year old
boy—the innocence of youth, and the deep, unencumbered love for his favorite
57. Sadly, H.A. will never know a life in which his face and name are not
inextricably linked to false accusations of racist conduct. When you Google H.A.’s
name, the first result states that he has “been accused of racism by a reporter” for
Deadspin. The second alleges that the “article alleged that [the Armenta’s] son,
[H.A.], exhibited racist behavior[.]” The third describes what happened to H.A. as
26
angle screenshot, an image that Phillips framed to evince America’s worst historical
friends, and potential employers—that he was not wearing blackface and he does not
hate Native Americans. He did not ask for this, he did not deserve it, and he should
59. Plaintiffs repeat and allege paragraphs 1-58 as if set forth fully herein.
the Article authored by Phillips headlined “The NFL needs to speak out against the
made the following false and defamatory statements of fact about the Armenta
b) The title of the Article, “The NFL needs to speak out against the
Kansas City Chiefs fan in Black face, Native headdress.”
c) “[O]n Sunday afternoon in Las Vegas, a Kansas City Chiefs fan
[H.A.] found a way to hate Black people and the Native Americans
at the same time.”
27
unanswered questions.”
g) “This [H.A.] is what happens when you ban books, stand against
Critical Race Theory, and try to erase centuries of hate. You give
future generations [H.A.] the ammunition they need to evolve and
recreate racism better than before.”
fact about H.A., Raul Armenta, and Shannon Armenta, and those statements were
understood by people who saw and read them to be statements of fact about H.A.,
understood to convey, three distinct defamatory messages: first, that H.A. wore
blackface to the Chiefs vs. Raiders game on November 26, a public display of vile
racist conduct towards Black people; second, that H.A. hates Native Americans and
demonstrated that hate by wearing a Native American headdress to the game; and
third, that H.A.’s parents Raul and Shannon Armenta “taught” H.A. to “hate [Black
65. First, H.A. did not wear blackface; he wore his favorite team’s colors,
28
black and red. Because he did not wear blackface, Deadspin’s accusation that H.A.
engaged in racist conduct towards Black people is false. Moreover, H.A. does not
67. Third, Raul and Shannon Armenta did not teach, and they have never
“taught” H.A. to “hate [Black people and Native Americans] in the home”—quite
the opposite. Raul and Shannon Armenta have never taught H.A. to engage in or
supported racist acts against either Black people or Native Americans—in fact, they
68. The Article, which is less than 1,000 words long, uses the words
“racism” or “racist” nine times, and “hate” five times, further bolstering the above
defamatory on their face. They expose H.A., Raul Armenta and Shannon Armenta
29
71. Defendant published its defamatory statements with negligence and/or
only needs to prove negligence to recover. Nor are his parents public figures. In
this instance, however, Defendant knew its statements were false, or recklessly
72. Specifically, Defendant acted with actual malice because: (1) Phillips
and Deadspin knew that H.A. was wearing Kansas City Chiefs’ team colors at a
football game at the time Phillips wrote the Article for Deadspin but published it
anyway to further his preconceived narrative that anyone wearing black face paint
must hate Black people; (2) Phillips and Deadspin knew that H.A. was wearing
Kansas City Chiefs’ team colors and a costume headdress at a football game at the
time Phillips wrote the Article for Deadspin but published it anyway to further his
must hate Native American people; (3) Defendant selectively screen captured an
image of H.A. to make it appear his face was painted fully black after seeing H.A.’s
face was painted half red and half black, then falsely accused him wearing blackface;
(4) Defendant was motivated by hostility and ill will toward H.A. and his family
because Phillips sought to target and harm H.A. for his costume because that
costume did not align with Phillips’ own politics; (5) Defendant had a financial
motive to publish defamatory falsehoods about H.A. and his family; and
30
(6) Defendant refused to retract or correct its false and defamatory statements, and
instead, doubled down by republishing the Article and threatening the Armenta
Family.
73. Even if Deadspin and Phillips did not selectively edit the Misleading
Picture (or direct someone at Deadspin to selectively edit it), but simply found it
online, Deadspin still acted with gross negligence. Reporters are ethically obligated
to reach out to subjects of negative news coverage for comment14—and have even
more of an acute responsibility to avoid harming small children. In fact, the Society
for Professional Journalists counsels that “private people have a greater right to
control information about themselves than public figures and others who seek power,
to the Armenta Family for comment. Had he done so, he would have learned that
14
Society for Professional Journalists, Code of Ethics: “Diligently seek subjects of
news coverage to allow them to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing.”
https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
15
Id.
31
intending to cause injury to Plaintiffs, and its behavior constitutes a willful and
conscious disregard of their rights. Among the other acts described herein,
Defendant repeatedly doubled down on its false narrative over a course of weeks,
despite knowing that its statements had no basis in fact. This serial display of
contempt for Plaintiffs’ rights shows an intent to injure and despicable conduct
statements, H.A., Shannon and Raul Armenta have suffered significant reputational
76. Plaintiffs repeat and allege paragraphs 1-75 as if set forth fully herein.
the Article authored by Phillips headlined “The NFL needs to speak out against the
78. Defendant made a series of false statements about the Armenta Family
defamatory implication that Shannon and Raul Armenta had dressed H.A. in
blackface, and that H.A. dressed in blackface because his parents had “taught”
32
create that defamatory implication:
c) “The answers to all of those questions lead back to the NFL. … While
it isn’t the league’s responsibility to stop racism and hate from being
taught in the home, they are a league that has relentlessly participated
in prejudice.”
80. This implication is false and defamatory for reasons described above.
Because H.A. was not wearing blackface, Shannon and Raul Armenta could not have
dressed him in it. Because H.A. was not engaging in a racist act against Native
could not have taught him “racism and hate” leading to or stemming from that act.
that Shannon and Raul Armenta taught him to hate in their home, and Defendant’s
only basis for these statements being its false accusations that H.A. was wearing
only interpret this juxtaposition as implying that Shannon and Raul Armenta dressed
33
83. Specifically, Defendant acted with actual malice because: (1) Phillips
and Deadspin knew that H.A. was wearing Kansas City Chiefs’ team colors at a
football game at the time Phillips wrote the Article for Deadspin but published it
anyway to further his preconceived narrative that anyone wearing black face paint
must hate Black people; (2) Phillips and Deadspin knew that H.A. was wearing
Kansas City Chiefs’ team colors and a costume headdress at a football game at the
time Phillips wrote the Article for Deadspin but published it anyway to further his
must hate Native American people; (3) Defendant selectively screen captured an
image of H.A. to make it appear his face was painted fully black despite knowing
his face was painted half red and half black, then falsely accused him wearing
blackface; (4) Defendant was motivated by hostility and ill will toward H.A. and his
family because Phillips sought to target and harm H.A. for wearing a costume that
did not align with Phillips’ own politics; (5) Defendant had a financial motive to
publish defamatory falsehoods about H.A. and his family; and (6) Defendant refused
to retract or correct its false and defamatory statements, and instead, doubled down
disregard of their rights. Among the other acts described herein, Defendant
34
repeatedly doubled down on its narrative over a course of weeks, despite knowing
that its statements and/or implications had literally no basis in fact. This serial
display of contempt for Plaintiffs’ rights shows an intent to injure and despicable
statements, Shannon and Raul Armenta have suffered significant reputational and
the Article authored by Phillips headlined “The NFL needs to speak out against the
Kansas City Chiefs fan in Black face, Native headdress[,]” also referred to herein as
the “Republication.” The Republication includes the November 27, 2023 Article in
full, with an all-caps “(UPDATE)” in its title and a new byline “Santa Ynez Band of
made the following false and defamatory statements of fact about the Armenta
35
b) The title of the Article, “The NFL needs to speak out against the
Kansas City Chiefs fan in Black face, Native headdress”
c) “[O]n Sunday afternoon in Las Vegas, a Kansas City Chiefs fan
[H.A.] found a way to hate Black people and the Native Americans
at the same time.”
g) “This [H.A.] is what happens when you ban books, stand against
Critical Race Theory, and try to erase centuries of hate. You give
future generations [H.A.] the ammunition they need to evolve and
recreate racism better than before.”
fact about H.A., Raul Armenta, and Shannon Armenta, and those statements were
understood by people who saw and read them to be statements of fact about H.A.,
understood to convey, three distinct defamatory messages: first, that H.A. wore
blackface to the Chiefs vs. Raiders game on November 26, a public display of vile
racist conduct towards Black people; second, that H.A. hates Native Americans and
36
demonstrated that hate by wearing a Native American headdress to the game, and
third, that H.A.’s parents Raul and Shannon Armenta “taught” H.A. to “hate [Black
92. First, H.A. did not wear blackface; he wore his favorite team’s colors,
black and red. Because he did not wear blackface, Deadspin’s accusation that H.A.
engaged in racist conduct towards Black people is false. Moreover, H.A. does not
94. Third, Raul and Shannon Armenta did not teach, and they have never
“taught” H.A. to “hate [Black people and Native Americans] in the home”—quite
the opposite. Raul and Shannon Armenta have never taught H.A. to engage in or
supported racist acts against either Black people or Native Americans—in fact, they
95. The Article, which is less than 1,000 words long, uses the words
“racism” or “racist” nine times, and “hate” five times, further bolstering the above
37
defamatory on their face. They expose H.A., Raul Armenta and Shannon Armenta
only needs to prove negligence to recover. Nor are his parents public figures. In
this instance, however, Defendant knew its statements were false, or recklessly
disregarded the truth or falsity of its statements when it republished them in full on
November 30.
99. Specifically, Defendant acted with actual malice because: (1) Deadspin
and Phillips knew that H.A. was wearing Kansas City Chiefs’ team colors at a
football game at the time Phillips wrote the Article for Deadspin but published it
anyway to further his preconceived narrative that anyone wearing black face paint
must hate Black people; (2) Deadspin and Phillips knew that H.A. was wearing
Kansas City Chiefs’ team colors and a costume headdress at a football game at the
time Phillips wrote the Article for Deadspin but published it anyway to further the
must hate Native American people (3) Defendant selectively screen captured an
38
image of H.A. to make it appear his face was painted fully black despite knowing
his face was painted half red and half black, then falsely accused him wearing
blackface; (4) Defendant was motivated by hostility and ill will toward H.A. and his
family because Phillips sought to target and harm H.A. and his family for his
costume because that costume did not align with Phillips’ own politics; (5)
Defendant had a financial motive to publish defamatory falsehoods about H.A. and
his family; (6) thousands of commentators on X and several media reports informed
Defendant that H.A.’s face was both black and red, and therefore he was not wearing
H.A.’s mother Shannon Armenta, stated that H.A. was Native American, but
Defendant republished its false allegations despite knowing that those allegations
were false; and (8) Defendant refused to retract or correct its false and defamatory
statements, and instead doubled down by republishing the Article and threatening
100. Even if Deadspin and Phillips did not selectively edit the Misleading
Picture (or direct someone at Deadspin to selectively edit it), but simply found it
online, Deadspin still acted with gross negligence. Reporters are ethically obligated
39
to reach out to subjects of negative news coverage for comment16—and have even
more of an acute responsibility to avoid harming small children. In fact, the Society
for Professional Journalists counsels that “private people have a greater right to
control information about themselves than public figures and others who seek power,
intending to cause injury to Plaintiffs, and its behavior constitutes a willful and
conscious disregard of their rights. Among the other acts described herein,
Defendant repeatedly doubled down on its false narrative over a course of weeks,
despite knowing that its statements had no basis in fact. This serial display of
contempt for Plaintiffs’ rights shows an intent to injure and despicable conduct
statements, H.A., Shannon and Raul Armenta have suffered significant reputational
16
Society for Professional Journalists, Code of Ethics: “Diligently seek subjects of
news coverage to allow them to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing.”
https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
17
Id.
40
COUNT IV – DEFAMATION BY IMPLICATION
(FOR THE NOVEMBER 30 REPUBLICATION)
103. Plaintiffs repeat and allege paragraphs 1-102 as if set forth fully herein.
104. Defendant made a series of false statements about the Armenta Family
defamatory implication that Shannon and Raul Armenta had dressed H.A. in
blackface, and that H.A. dressed in Blackface because his parents had “taught”
c) “The answers to all of those questions lead back to the NFL. … While
it isn’t the league’s responsibility to stop racism and hate from being
taught in the home, they are a league that has relentlessly participated
in prejudice.”
106. This implication is false and defamatory for reasons described above.
Because H.A. was not wearing blackface, Shannon and Raul Armenta could not have
dressed him in it. Because H.A. was not engaging in a racist act against Native
could not have taught him “racism and hate” leading to or stemming from that act.
41
factual allegation of wrongful conduct. Given H.A.’s age, Defendant’s accusation
that Shannon and Raul Armenta taught him to hate in their home, and Defendant’s
only basis for these statements being its false accusations that H.A. was wearing
only interpret this juxtaposition as implying that Shannon and Raul Armenta dressed
109. Specifically, Defendant acted with actual malice because: (1) Deadspin
and Phillips knew that H.A. was wearing Kansas City Chiefs’ team colors at a
football game at the time Phillips wrote the Article for Deadspin but published it
anyway to further his preconceived narrative that anyone wearing black face paint
must hate Black people; (2) Deadspin and Phillips knew that H.A. was wearing
Kansas City Chiefs’ team colors and a costume headdress at a football game at the
time Phillips wrote the Article for Deadspin but published it anyway to further the
must hate Native American people (3) Defendant selectively screen captured an
image of H.A. to make it appear his face was painted fully black despite knowing
his face was painted half red and half black, then falsely accused him of wearing
blackface; (4) Defendant was motivated by hostility and ill will toward H.A. and his
42
family because Phillips sought to target and harm H.A. and his family for his
costume because that costume did not align with Phillips’ own politics; (5)
Defendant had a financial motive to publish defamatory falsehoods about H.A. and
his family; (6) thousands of commentators on X and several media reports informed
Defendant that H.A.’s face was both black and red, and therefore he was not wearing
H.A.’s mother Shannon Armenta, stated that H.A. was Native American, but
Defendant republished its false allegations despite knowing that those allegations
were false, and (8) Defendant refused to retract or correct its false and defamatory
statements, and instead, doubled down by republishing the Article and threatening
disregard of their rights. Among the other acts described herein, Defendant
repeatedly doubled down on its narrative over a course of weeks, despite knowing
that its statements and/or implications had literally no basis in fact. This serial
display of contempt for Plaintiffs’ rights shows an intent to injure and despicable
43
statements, Shannon and Raul Armenta have suffered significant reputational and
112. Plaintiffs repeat and allege paragraphs 1-111 as if set forth fully herein.
another update of the Article authored by Phillips headlined “The NFL needs to
speak out against the Kansas City Chiefs fan in Black face, Native headdress[.]”
made the following false and defamatory statements of fact about the Armenta
a) “It takes a lot to disrespect two groups of people at once. But on Sunday
afternoon in Las Vegas, someone in the stands at the Kansas City
Chiefs game found a way, leading to lots of unanswered questions.”
b) “The answers to those questions lead back to the NFL. While it isn’t
the league’s responsibility to stop racism, they are a league that has
relentlessly participated in prejudice.”
c) “This is what happens when you ban books, stand against Critical Race
Theory, and try to erase centuries of hate. You give future generations
the ammunition they need to evolve and recreate racism better than
before.”
d) “As of now, the league hasn't released a statement on what took place
in the stands in Las Vegas on Sunday.”
fact about H.A., Raul Armenta, and Shannon Armenta, and those statements were
44
understood by people who saw and read them to be statements of fact about H.A.,
Raul Armenta, and Shannon Armenta. This is because, due to the incredible press
coverage that the Article and the Republication had generated, a reasonable reader
would interpret statements such as “someone in the stands at the Kansas City
Chiefs game” to be about H.A. Similarly, a reasonable reader would interpret the
phrase of “it isn’t the league’s responsibility to stop racism” to refer to H.A. and
his family as reported in the November 27 Article. The alleged “future generation”
who was “evolve[ing] and recreat[ing] racism better than before” was a clear
reference to H.A., and “what took place in the stands in Las Vegas on Sunday”
was again a reference to H.A. and his parents, namely that they dressed him in
blackface and allowed him to wear a Native American headdress because they hate
understood to convey, three distinct defamatory messages: first, that H.A. wore
blackface to the Chiefs vs. Raiders game on November 26, a public display of vile
racist conduct towards Black people; second, that H.A. hates Native Americans and
demonstrated that hate by wearing a Native American headdress to the game, and
third, that H.A.’s parents Raul and Shannon Armenta “taught” H.A. to “hate [Black
45
118. First, H.A. did not wear blackface; he wore his favorite team’s colors,
black and red. Because he did not wear blackface, Deadspin’s accusation that H.A.
engaged in racist conduct towards Black people is false. Moreover, H.A. does not
120. Third, Raul and Shannon Armenta did not teach, and they have never
“taught” H.A. to “hate [Black people and Native Americans] in the home”—quite
the opposite. Raul and Shannon Armenta have never taught H.A. to engage in or
supported racist acts against either Black people or Native Americans—in fact, they
121. The Article, which is less than 1,000 words long, uses the words
“racism” or “racist” nine times, and “hate” five times, further bolstering the above
defamatory on their face. They expose H.A., Raul Armenta and Shannon Armenta
46
its defamatory statements or, if it did, abused that privilege.
only needs to prove negligence to recover. Nor are his parents public figures. In
this instance, however, Defendant knew its statements were false, or recklessly
125. Specifically, Defendant acted with actual malice because: (1) Deadspin
and Phillips knew that H.A. was wearing Kansas City Chiefs’ team colors at a
football game at the time Phillips wrote the Article for Deadspin but published it
anyway to further his preconceived narrative that anyone wearing black face paint
must hate Black people; (2) Deadspin and Phillips knew that H.A. was wearing
Kansas City Chiefs’ team colors and a costume headdress at a football game at the
time Phillips wrote the Article for Deadspin but published it anyway to further the
must hate Native American people (3) Defendant selectively screen captured an
image of H.A. to make it appear his face was painted fully black despite knowing
his face was painted half red and half black, then falsely accused him wearing
blackface; (4) Defendant was motivated by hostility and ill will toward H.A. and his
family because Phillips sought to target and harm H.A. and his family for his
costume because that costume did not align with Phillips’ own politics; (5)
47
Defendant had a financial motive to publish defamatory falsehoods about H.A. and
his family; (6) thousands of commentators on X and several media reports informed
Defendant that H.A.’s face was both black and red, and therefore he was not wearing
blackface, and in such volume that X appended a “community note” before the
H.A.’s mother Shannon Armenta, stated that H.A. was Native American, but
Defendant republished its false allegations despite knowing that those allegations
were false; and (8) Defendant refused to retract or correct its false and defamatory
statements, and instead, doubled down by republishing the Article and threatening
intending to cause injury to Plaintiffs, and its behavior constitutes a willful and
conscious disregard of their rights. Among the other acts described herein,
Defendant repeatedly doubled down on its false narrative over a course of weeks,
despite knowing that its statements had no basis in fact. This serial display of
contempt for Plaintiffs’ rights shows an intent to injure and despicable conduct
statements, H.A., Shannon and Raul Armenta have suffered significant reputational
48
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter judgment
(4) awarding the Armenta Family all costs, disbursements, fees, and
interest as authorized by law; and
(5) such other and additional remedies as the Court may deem just
and proper.
49