Can You Release Lies to the Media?

[azdubster1]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Arizona

Facts:
-- My wife is a principal of a school.
-- Superintendent made up lies in her evaluation to get rid of her.
-- My wife filed an 18 page rebuttal that stated we have physical evidence that would disprove all negatives. Cited a couple.
-- We have 200 pages of physical evidence that proves they are lies.
-- Long story short, she resigned two weeks ago with a settlement. In the settlement was a confidentiality agreement that both sides signed.
-- A few days ago the local paper ran an article filled with the lies that were in her evaluation. The reporter never tried to contact us (her)...and the district never gave the rebuttal to the reporter.
-- The article printed things such as the superintendent saying she didn't have integrity (it was in the evaluation...he did not comment) and made it sound like she was incompetent and maybe even embezzeled money.
-- We assume she got it from Freedom of Information Act.

Questions:

1. Can the district release false information that is in an performance evaluation?

2. Is a personal evaluation part of the personnel package that cannot be released via Freedom of Information?

3. Because the superintendent knowingly released lies (he had the 18 page rebuttal telling him they were all lies) can he or the district be sued for libal or actual malice?

To be honest...if we never get a dime our first and foremost motive is to get my wife's name back.

-- She has been in education for over a decade, never had a bad evaluation (all execllent)
-- the superintenent gave her a glowing recommendation for her application to college two months earlier.
-- The superintendent gave her contract to her at the end of June, then the dishonest evaluation one week later?

She can never get a professional job again if people simply google her name. It will say she has no integrity and is a horrible person. This horrible person has created programs for blind children schools, is an expert at special education, worked with learning disabled to get them employment and was the principal of title one school. Her life is integrity.

This was an abuse of power to the highest degree because he could do it. This cannot be legal in this country, can it?

Thank you all for your time and comments.

 

[azdubster1]

Two Additional Notes:

We are thinking about filing a "Notice of Claim" where we release her rebuttal, but a "bigger and better" one to the media. This will get her story out..and on the internet. We don't care if they come back and sue us for the settlement...this is really about saving her name. Making them pay with their jobs would be a bonus.

The confidentiality agreement stated that they would use all legal means necessary to protect the agreement. Should they have fought releasing the evaluation? Especially knowing it was not truthful?

 

[quincy]

It sounds like the information printed by the newspaper came directly from the superintendant's mouth and not from the evaluation itself.

Your wife could potentialy have a defamation action against the superintendant she can consider, but you would want to go over all of the facts (what exactly was printed and how what was printed is worded) with an attorney in your area.

I strongly recommend that neither you nor your wife do anything about responding to the story or releasing any information that would violate the confidentiality agreement before speaking with an attorney.

Good luck.

 

[azdubster1]

It sounds like the information printed by the newspaper came directly from the superintendant's mouth and not from the evaluation itself.

Thank you for your response, but the reporter cited it, "according to the review."

So again I think the question that I have is that can you provide a dishonest review to the media, knowing that you have a rebuttal that says all of your "facts" within that review are incorrect at best?

They say (a lot of people) that a school principal is a "public" person and therefore we have to prove "actual malice"...I believe we can, I just think it's important for me to find out if they can release it knowing it was not true or accurate?

The irony is within the article the following sentence is lost, almost like a throw away line...which in my opinion should have been the story.

"When the reporter requested public records related to any disciplinary action against Principal, the district responded that none existed."

According to this one sided story, she was horrible...but they kept paying her for seven months...why wasn't there any disciplinary action or an improvement plan which was standard for this district?

You don't know me from Adam (but this is true)...we went to mediation. The mediator has several decades of mediation with like a 98% success rate. He told us, "you know after 6 hours of doing this I still have no idea why they are firing you? In fact I told them that they do not want this case to get in front of a jury, it will pass summary."

 

[quincy]

First, lies can be released to the media (and often are ).

Bob Woodward of the Washington Post once said that any journalistic story published should be "the best obtainable version of the truth." To publish this "best obtainable version," a newspaper will generally investigate and verify any claims that are made, and they will generally present both sides of any one story. The best version of the truth is often found somewhere in the middle.

Why your local newspaper did not contact your wife for comment is something I can't tell you - although, with the confidentiality agreement in place she, like the superintendant, would have had to refrain from commenting. Why the local newspaper did not include your wife's "rebuttal" in their story is also something I can't tell you - unless the rebuttal had not yet become a part of your wife's personnel file at the time the reporter accessed the records.

I could not find anything in Arizona law that would prohibit the disclosure of your wife's personnel records to the media, by the way. Based on Arizona's Public Records Act (see ARS 39-128), disciplinary records and settlement agreements of public officers and employees are open for public viewing. It is entirely possible that the reporter obtained the records which detailed the superintendant's comments on the evaluation and published the evaluation and comments as written. Even if the evaluation contained lies told by the superintendant, the publication of the lies would be a truthful accounting of what the superintendant said in the evaluation.

Public interest in knowing the reasons behind your wife's departure would typically outweigh any privacy or confidentiality interests. In Michigan, for instance (and I know that states look at these issues differently, but I happen to know Michigan better ), such personnel documents are publicly available on the theory that, as Michigan courts have said, by making them open to the public they are "more likely to foster candid, accurate and conscientious evaluations," as evaluators who contribute to a personnel file will be aware that what they write can be scrutinized by the public. It appears the superintendant may have been candid in your wife's evaluation, if not exactly accurate and conscientious.

Again, I would have all of the facts and information and documents, including the newspaper article that was written, reviewed by an attorney in your area. It is possible that the superintendant defamed your wife and/or the newspaper erred in publishing defamatory material or placed your wife in a false light by publishing only part of the story. Then it is also possible that there is nothing that can be done legally to remedy the matter. Short of violating the confidentiality agreement to present your wife's side of the story, your wife may have no recourse.

But I again recommend that you do not take any action on your own without speaking to an attorney first, for a review of the facts and a discussion of options that may be available.

 

[azdubster1]

I agree with Woodard. BTW my stance in here really isn't questioning whether it could be released (though I would hope that they couldn't) my challenge is not releasing everything and moreso releasing the dishonest version. I mean if I do a release to the media and say the superintendent is is a pedophile I would be sued at the least because it would be untrue. So how can he release lies?

BTW...here is a code you haven't seen...it;'s something, but it's not what I a hanging our hat on.

Truth has to be the law here...doesn't it?

http://www.hr.state.az.us/homepagelinks/adoarules1.pdf

Arizona Administrative Code, Regulation 2-5-105 B.

Content. An employee’s official personnel file shall contain:

1. A copy of the job application or resume for the
employee’s current regular position;
2. A copy of all performance appraisal reports completed as
required by R2-5-503;
3. Personnel action forms that have authorized changes in
employment status, position, classification, pay, or leave
status;
4. Letters of commendation as established by agency policy;
5. Correspondence concerning disciplinary actions as
described in Article 8, and letters of reprimand, documents
acknowledging receipt of reprimand or other disciplinary
communications, or other related employee
objections that are not filed as grievances under Article 7,
and
6. Corrective action plans and performance planning documents.

 

[quincy]

I am not seeing the relevance of the bolded portion of the Administrative Code, unless you are thinking that the newspaper should have given some space to your wife's performance record to counter-balance the superintendant's evaluation?

Performance reviews may have been something, perhaps, that should have been included as a part of any story on your wife's resignation, to balance the story a bit. I suppose it is possible that the entire file and/or the performance reviews were not included in the information requested by the newspaper - it may be they just requested the evaluation that led to your wife's resignation. That would be odd, but it is a possibility.

Whatever the case, a review of all of the facts and what exactly was written would be necessary.

But I think an invasion of privacy/false light action is something your wife might want to discuss with the attorney she sees, if the newspaper story is so slanted that it gives readers a false impression of your wife and what happened with her resignation. I am not sure what the invasion of privacy laws are in Arizona, or even whether Arizona recognizes false light as a tort separate from defamation - some states don't. Without proof of actual malice, however, a successful false light suit against the paper would not be possible, and actual malice is awfully difficult to prove.

Again, I think your wife's best course of action is to consult with an attorney in your area to see what her options are.

Good luck.