Posted on 09/28/2011 12:34:48 PM PDT by Hawk720
Sarah Palin may have threatened to sue the publisher and author of a scathing book about her life, but her rise to fame and public prominence since her failed 2008 vice presidential bid could make her case difficult to prove, according to attorneys who deal with similar cases.
Palin’s attorney sent a letter to Crown Publishing, a division of Random House, Monday evening, informing them Palin may sue the publishing house and author of “The Rogue,” Joe McGinniss, “for knowingly publishing false statements” in the book released last week.
But attorneys who handle defamation and libel cases involving public figures say it’s not easy to prove the legal standard of whether an author either knowingly published false reporting or had malicious intent. James Janowitz, a New York attorney who has defended celebrities in defamation cases, says the bar for Palin’s potential suit ”is as high as it gets.”
“The standard is very high. It requires falsity of the statements of the reports or actual malice, and maybe they could meet that standard, but there is nothing here that would indicate they could,” Janowitz said after examining the letter sent to Crown.
“The reporter or the author is not libelous merely for repeating or reporting false things about the subject, and that’s really the key thing. It doesn’t matter that’s he’s wrong. It matters whether or not he knew what he was writing was false,” Janowitz said. “If he had contrary information or if he made it up and it was false and he had no source at all and he did it for the purpose of either hurting her or boosting the sales of his book when he knew what he was saying was probably false, then he’s in trouble. But that’s a very high bar.”
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Normally that would be a high bar indeed. I suspect that the bar is much lower in this case given the history and public statements of the author.
Yes and there's that email that says he KNEW none of it could be proved.
McGinnis’s e-mail states otherwise. He KNEW his stories were bunk.
Don't even sue for monetary damages but for a letter of apology. That will destroy any remaining credibility this worthless pos has.
That determination is up to twelve people.
I think they should settle it in a closed room with just the author and Todd. ;)
I believe the Natinal Inquirer has paid millions of dollars for exactly the same thing. Let the courts decide, not some ‘experts’. If you want to print a hit piece, you had better make certain it’s factual.
Just taking a wild guess here BUT Shushannah............Amish?????????????????????? What, the parents were mental patients??????
Where is that?
Truth is an absolute defense so RH could depose all kinds of people and who knows what they would say. If the Palins claim extraordinary psychological damage from the defamation, they could be ordered to submit to an Independent Mental Examination.
Finally, McGinnis’s e-mail would only waive the atty-client privilege to the extent that he revealed it in the e-mail. Palins attys won’t be able to get at all the correspondence between RH and the attys.
In short, if the Palins are smart they will walk away from this suit.
“In short, if the Palins are smart they will walk away from this suit.”
Right - if people actually read this whole article, they’ll see why you are right. Do they REALLY want RH deposing everyone in this book? I think not.
Yep, McGinniss opened both himself and Random House wide open to a defamation suit with his email to Griffin. A bunch of Alaska bloggers are probably wetting their pants now since they also cooperated with the sleazebag in libeling and slandering the Palin family.
The only way to find out what the outcome will be is to sue. If nothing else, drag the scumbags through the courts until they beg for mercy.
(((((PING)))))
This is “news” by the Liberal outlet ABC. In reality, this is a far-Left blogger who despises Sarah Palin.
The media loves to pretend they are really journalists, not merely pieces of canine excrement.
Whatever. I hope it bankrupts that jackass author. He lied about her, and knew he lied. Whether the jury believes it or not, these liberals deserve to have their pockets drained. Maybe then they’ll believe in tort reform.
Why not sue for monetary damages, at least costs and legal fees? That alone would be PLENTY of $$$$ for McGinnis if not Random House.
Both the Palins and their attorney(s) are well aware that SP is a ‘public figure,’ per New York Times v. Sullivan. They must be aware also of protections for public figures. Among other things, his libel vs SP was in other than her role as a ‘public figure.’
I think this might be why we let lawyers and judges sort these kind of things out instead of “journalists”.
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.