Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cboldt

Fine points about the intent and recklessness of malice. Suffice to say, in a defamation suit, the malice of recklessness or intent is enough. The acts is one of ill will which is sufficient, even if the thought isn’t.


133 posted on 10/22/2016 1:33:58 PM PDT by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies ]


To: Jim 0216
-- Fine points about the intent and recklessness of malice. --

Another way to view my point is that defamation doesn't include an intent element. Read the case, NYT v. Sullivan. In defamation, the definition of "actual malice" is knowing the statement is false, or repeating it with reckless disregard for the truthfulness. The act does not need to involve ill will.

136 posted on 10/22/2016 1:40:21 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson