Dan Le Batard Defended Deadspin, Now Has No Comment After Outlet Incited Death Threats Toward Chiefs Fan

Dan Le Batard was one of the few pundits in the media who defended Deadspin last November after it used a deceptive photo to make it seem as if a 9-year-old Chiefs fan was wearing blackface. 

In actuality, the fan was wearing black and red face paint in support of his favorite football team. Deadspin showed only the side of his face painted black. The outlet used the photo as evidence the kid "hates black people."

Yet Le Batard asked his viewers not to blame Deadspin. He asked them to blame conservatives for inciting outrage over what he considered a non-story.

"The right picked this up and said, ‘Sue Deadspin, bankrupt Deadspin.’ And I can’t help but laugh at the center of this, I can’t help but laugh at the idea that they want them sued for one racism, while the kid is still in full racist garb," said Le Batard.

"The only part of him that’s not intentionally, kind of, racist is the black part! The rest is team colors and he’s going for just being a fan, but the racism is already in there, just not the kind the right is picking up and flogging Deadspin with over a 5-year-old kid. Like, the stupidity of this is remarkable."

Got that?

Don't blame Deadspin for falsely depicting an innocent child as a racist. Blame conservatives for noticing.

Dan Le Batard was scheduled to do an interview with OutKick this week. His team asked us. We said yes. But Le Batard backed out last minute, blaming a "scheduling miscommunication." 

He did not reschedule.

That's unfortunate. We would have liked to ask him about his defense of Deadspin after the family of the kid filed a lawsuit against the outlet on Monday.

Specifically, we would've liked to ask Le Batard if he stands by his claim that the article was harmless. According to the lawsuit, the article was anything but harmless.

Per the lawsuit:

"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---y," a "mother f---er," and a "n----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 emotional damage from the onslaught of negative attention."

The family and their nine-year-old fear for their lives. The child's grades have suffered, as a result. The family may have to move out of state for safety. 

All so that Deadspin could further its race-drenched political agenda, an agenda Le Batard supported.

But since Le Batard backed out of our interview, we asked him over email if he stands by downplaying the impact of the article and his defense of the author.

Unfortunately, he did not respond. We will be sure to update the story if he does. 

We did, however, notice that Le Batard previously deleted a tweet sharing the clip calling the nine-year-old's face paint "racist." Luckily, screenshots live forever. Especially if needed by a court. 

And court is where the case is likely to head.

Lawyers Lexie Rigden, Clay Tavis, and Will Cain all believe Deadspin is responsible for defamation. Cain discussed below, on Fox News Thursday:

"Bankruptcy is coming," added Clay.

Rigden elaborated on what the family needs to prove in court:

"Although defamation laws vary state by state, in general, to prove defamation, a plaintiff would have to show that a false statement was made (i.e. that this child is wearing blackface); that the statement was published to third parties (easy--it's all over the internet, with even Elon Musk commenting); that the defendant knew it was false or was at least was negligent in publishing it (Phillips and Deadspin saw the full photo and knew the context in which it was taken); and damages, that some harm was caused to the plaintiff's reputation (the death threats cited in the lawsuit)."

As a general rule, when you dishonestly disparage a school kid who cannot defend themselves -- you are the bad guy, the bully, and the ghoul.

Dan Le Batard and Deadspin are not the good guys.