Article

2019-03-11 Home Front: Culture Wars

The Covington Catholic Case Could Turn on ‘Actual Malice'

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Abu Uluque 2019-03-11 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11134 views ] Top

#1 Ah, the lawyers are once more claiming journalists can commit libel and slander with impunity, because the moment they do the target becomes a "public figure".

Posted by Rob Crawford 2019-03-11 07:08|| 2019-03-11 07:08|| Front Page Top

#2 If the defense is lack of actual malice, then it would seem to me that the kid's lawyers get to depose the reporters and editors (and owners) on how reporting decisions are made and what the attitudes of the reporters etc. are. We already know the answers, but buckets of popcorn there.

Posted by Matt 2019-03-11 09:27|| 2019-03-11 09:27|| Front Page Top

#3 Of course lawyers think it's complicated, that's what they get paid to do. Since the kid was not a pre-existing public figure and was essentially made one by their creation, the case would seem to hinge on the lack of appropriate due diligence in reporting. The question will then be whether that rises to the level of malice through overt negligence. Now any lawyer who would so much as contemplate summarizing a 9 figure case in a paragraph would be disbarred or shot, maybe both.

Posted by Cesare 2019-03-11 10:00|| 2019-03-11 10:00|| Front Page Top

#4 The courts have spent the last 40 years expanding the equal protection before the law and due process of the 14th Amendment into a super highway of power. Now they are about to crap on themselves building a pretzel of a rationale why there are 'public' and 'private' status in libel. The first amendment is not recourse to excuse wanton and reckless behavior of corporations.

Posted by Procopius2k 2019-03-11 10:43|| 2019-03-11 10:43|| Front Page Top

#5 The Media will have a real problem, do they cover the depositions themselves or they hope nobody pays attention as the appear on "alternative" media and reduce their all ready low influence on public opinion. Robot reporters are standing ready to uh report.

Posted by Snavimble Bucket1794 2019-03-11 12:20|| 2019-03-11 12:20|| Front Page Top

#6 So if it wasn't malice, then what was it? Overlooked incompetence and stupidity that crept into the system that transects several levels of management, fact checkers and reporting protocols which will magically be easily "corrected and implemented" in a couple of days now that is has been pointed out?

Posted by gorb 2019-03-11 15:31|| 2019-03-11 15:31|| Front Page Top

#7 Malice is not applicable unless its a public figure. The law is pretty clear about that - it only needs to be objectively untruthful and harm to the person or their reputation. Malice enters only when its a public figure. I rather doubt this kid was a public figure before the libel/slander event.

Claiming that this kid is a public figure because their actions in libeling him made him a public figure is about like the kid that murdered his parents saying he shouldn't be charged because he is now orphan.

If they are trying to shelter behind "absence of malice", they're dead meat.

Posted by Vespasian Unairt7733 2019-03-11 22:17|| 2019-03-11 22:17|| Front Page Top

23:43 Skidmark
23:42 Skidmark
23:39 Skidmark
23:08 CrazyFool
22:46 Vespasian Unairt7733
22:39 Vespasian Unairt7733
22:37 Vespasian Unairt7733
22:34 Vespasian Unairt7733
22:27 Vespasian Unairt7733
22:22 Vespasian Unairt7733
22:17 Vespasian Unairt7733
21:53 Silentbrick
21:23 Frank G
21:12 Skidmark
20:02 Voldemort Jase6572
18:58 charger
18:57 charger
18:01 gorb
17:55 Woodrow
17:35 USN, Ret.
17:29 Mike Kozlowski
17:20 rjschwarz
17:09 Frozen Al
16:43 gorb