Posted on 10/24/2003 10:14:40 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine
Edited on 10/24/2003 12:02:17 PM PDT by Lead Moderator. [history]
DEFAMATION -- LIBEL AND SLANDER
The First Amendment to the Constitution provides a broad right of freedom of speech. However, if a false statement has been made about you, you may have wondered if you could sue for defamation.
Generally, defamation consists of: (1) a false statement of fact about another; (2) an unprivileged publication of that statement to a third party; (3) some degree of fault, depending on the type of case; and (4) some harm or damage. Libel is defamation by the printed word and slander is defamation by the spoken word.
If the statement is made about a public official - for example, a police officer, mayor, school superintendent - or a public figure - that is a generally prominent person or a person who is actively involved in a public controversy, then it must be proven that the statement was made with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard for whether the statement was true or false. In other words, the fact that the statement was false is not enough to recover for defamation. On the other hand, if the statement was made about a private person, then it must be proven that the false statement was made without reasonable care as to whether the statement was true or false.
There are a number of defenses available in a defamation action. Of course, if a statement is true, there can be no action for defamation. Truth is a complete defense. Additionally, if the statement is an expression of an opinion as opposed to a statement of fact, there can be no action for defamation. We do not impose liability in this country for expressions of opinion. However, whether a statement will be deemed to be an expression of opinion as opposed to a statement of fact is not always an easy question to answer. For example, the mere fact that a statement is found in an editorial is not enough to qualify for the opinion privilege if the particular statement contained in the editorial is factual in nature.
There is also a privilege known as neutral reporting. For example, if a newspaper reports on newsworthy statements made about someone, the newspaper is generally protected if it makes a disinterested report of those statements. In some cases, the fact that the statements were made is newsworthy and the newspaper will not be held responsible for the truth of what is actually said.
There are other privileges as well. For example, where a person, such as a former employer, has a duty to make reports to other people and makes a report in good faith without any malicious intent, that report will be protected even though it may not be totally accurate.
Another example of a privilege is a report on a judicial proceeding. News organizations and others reporting on activities that take place in a courtroom are protected from defamation actions if they have accurately reported what took place.
If you think you have been defamed by a newspaper, magazine, radio or television station, you must make a demand for retraction before a lawsuit can be filed. If the newspaper, magazine, radio or television station publishes a retraction, you can still file suit, but your damages may be limited. Unless the media defendant acted with malice, bad faith or reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the story, you can only recover your actual damages. No punitive damages can be assessed in the absence of these elements.
An action for libel or slander must be brought within two years of the time the statements were made. If you wait beyond this two year period, any lawsuit will be barred.
Libel and slander cases are often very complicated. Before you decide to take any action in a libel or slander case, you should consult with an attorney. An attorney can help you decide whether you have a case and advise you regarding the time and expense involved in bringing this type of action.
(updated 12/01)
Since you clearly have some first hand experience with spreading wild statements can you possibly respond to some questions regarding your past association with, among others...:
One_particular_harbour
JoeEveryman
habs4ever
Panjandrum
Perhaps it is.
You misunderstood it twice. You are a moron.
Go away, creep. Go back to kicking your dog or whatever else it is you do for fun.
You can't even keep black and white straight in your own black and white mind.
Huh? Now you're just not making sense. But I'll try a different tack. In post # 716, you state "Mine is ALWAYS an opinion, just like it says." That is an assertion of fact. In other words you declared (made an assertion) that you always post an opinion (perform a certain action which is one of the definitions of the 'fact'). Never mind that your assertion of fact in # 716 is inherently contradictory with itself.
Thanks, 'grl. I won't be bullied by some pissed off Canadian who's so angry with the world he piles on every freeper he sees.
I am not accusing him of being a communist, a fascist, a vegetarian, or even a Yankees fan. I just want to know that he is being an honest broker here. What are his stakes, biases here. That is all. If you think it's an unfair question, so be it. I think it is absolutely fair and should be addressed.
Well I'll be.
That might've been one of the most spot-on, eloquent & ballsy things I've ever read from you, my *friend*.
Respect hereby granted forevermore.
There.
I said it.
...will miracles never cease. ;^)
Why go so far to starve her when her parents are more than willing to take her? I don't get it.
Are you a moral relativist or not? Yes or no.
I can't tell from your statement, so I'll ask you. My best estimate from reading all or most of the Terri threads in the past few weeks is that perhaps 20-50 FReepers were actually making phone calls or sending emails to legislators. Are you implying that they caused the legislature to pass Terri's bill?
Did you happen to hear Terri's mom, dad, brother and sister all being interviewed together on the Glenn Beck show the day after Terri's Bill passed? If not, you may not have heard them say that the Governor's office received approx 150,000 phoned/faxed/emailed petitions from Mr. Beck's listeners.
I read a thread here yesterday with a cut and paste from Christian Politics.com who claimed that over 60,000 petitions were sent from their website. Did you happen to see that one?
Depending on your perspective, I'd say the power of FR to influence the FL legislature was either much less than you hope, or much less than you fear.
OH NO!! Say it isn't so!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.