Criminal accusation

[RonNYC]

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

A person I know (this is definitely NOT me) was arrested, tried and convicted of murder. He contests that conviction and claims innocence, as he has. His claims have some merit (more than "it wasn't me"). During the trial and in an appeal he accused another person of the murder, who closely matched the description of the killer, unlike the person convicted. That person never denied it or made any statement and in fact was at the scene at the time of the crime. Apparently there were newspaper articles at the time which printed that accusation and it is on line where the appeal was published. Now the man in prison wrote an autobiography and in it he talks about the killing, repeating in some detail his view of the crime which again implicates this other person. NOW I know anyone can sue anyone else for anything. May not be successful but they can. Is it likely that the person in prison could be successfully sued for defamation? The other person was definitely there at the time of the crime.

In other words, he is maintaining his theory of the crime which he did on the witness stand. He is not alone in that accusation. He is trying to free himself.

 

[anearthw]

How much money does one wish to spend (and not recover, because the man is in prison)? Whether or not there is merit to the case, defamation involves a lot of time and money spent.

 

[Proserpina]

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

A person I know (this is definitely NOT me) was arrested, tried and convicted of murder. He contests that conviction and claims innocence, as he has. His claims have some merit (more than "it wasn't me"). During the trial and in an appeal he accused another person of the murder, who closely matched the description of the killer, unlike the person convicted. That person never denied it or made any statement and in fact was at the scene at the time of the crime. Apparently there were newspaper articles at the time which printed that accusation and it is on line where the appeal was published. Now the man in prison wrote an autobiography and in it he talks about the killing, repeating in some detail his view of the crime which again implicates this other person. NOW I know anyone can sue anyone else for anything. May not be successful but they can. Is it likely that the person in prison could be successfully sued for defamation? The other person was definitely there at the time of the crime.

In other words, he is maintaining his theory of the crime which he did on the witness stand. He is not alone in that accusation. He is trying to free himself.

The short answer is "yes". Legally, your friend is guilty. Period. Even if. Until the other guy is successfully prosecuted, he needs to not write that autobiography.

 

[RonNYC]

further question

The short answer is "yes". Legally, your friend is guilty. Period. Even if. Until the other guy is successfully prosecuted, he needs to not write that autobiography.

Further question: Why? I mean, the guy's in prison. Has no assets. What's the downside?

 

[quincy]

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

A person I know (this is definitely NOT me) was arrested, tried and convicted of murder. He contests that conviction and claims innocence, as he has. His claims have some merit (more than "it wasn't me"). During the trial and in an appeal he accused another person of the murder, who closely matched the description of the killer, unlike the person convicted. That person never denied it or made any statement and in fact was at the scene at the time of the crime. Apparently there were newspaper articles at the time which printed that accusation and it is on line where the appeal was published. Now the man in prison wrote an autobiography and in it he talks about the killing, repeating in some detail his view of the crime which again implicates this other person. NOW I know anyone can sue anyone else for anything. May not be successful but they can. Is it likely that the person in prison could be successfully sued for defamation? The other person was definitely there at the time of the crime.

In other words, he is maintaining his theory of the crime which he did on the witness stand. He is not alone in that accusation. He is trying to free himself.

I'm sorry, but I am not real clear on the situation. Could you explain it a little better?

From what I understand, you say that a man convicted of murder and currently in prison has written an autobiography and in this autobiography he names another person as the real murderer? And the convicted murderer's story is based on his life (of course) but also supports his claims of the other person's guilt with court records and news reports of the crime?

And your question is if the person who is NOT in prison, who was named as the real murderer in this autobiography, can sue for defamation?

Do I have the facts right?

 

[anearthw]

And your question is if the person who is NOT in prison, who was named as the real murderer in this autobiography, can sue for defamation?

That is how I read it.

 

[eerelations]

That is how I read it.

Me too.

I think OP is wondering why the guy in prison should even care whether or not he gets sued given that he has no money to pay anyway. My response to why he should care is this:

1. He will lose whatever credibility he currently has if he's sued; said credibility will be accompanied by any remaining hope that he might get his conviction reversed.

2. If he's expecting to make any money from the sale of this "autobiography" well, he won't, all profits will be diverted to the person who sues him.

3. Any post-prison earnings he may get far in the future will be garnished.

 

[RonNYC]

Me too.

I think OP is wondering why the guy in prison should even care whether or not he gets sued given that he has no money to pay anyway. My response to why he should care is this:

1. He will lose whatever credibility he currently has if he's sued; said credibility will be accompanied by any remaining hope that he might get his conviction reversed.

2. If he's expecting to make any money from the sale of this "autobiography" well, he won't, all profits will be diverted to the person who sues him.


3. Any post-prison earnings he may get far in the future will be garnished.

I don't think he can make a profit from his book in any case since Texas as a Son of Sam law. As for credibility, I'm not sure how a lawsuit would diminish that. Not arguing with you, just don't see how. But the points are all well taken.

If he publishes the autobiography with the portion of the crime (which is only a few paragraphs) removed, that might solve the problem?

 

[RonNYC]

I'm sorry, but I am not real clear on the situation. Could you explain it a little better?

From what I understand, you say that a man convicted of murder and currently in prison has written an autobiography and in this autobiography he names another person as the real murderer? And the convicted murderer's story is based on his life (of course) but also supports his claims of the other person's guilt with court records and news reports of the crime?

And your question is if the person who is NOT in prison, who was named as the real murderer in this autobiography, can sue for defamation?

Do I have the facts right?

The other person is already named in an appeal, so it is not out of the blue. Other than that you are correct. The book is not mainly about his innocence. It doesn't hinge on it.

 

[Proserpina]

The other person is already named in an appeal, so it is not out of the blue. Other than that you are correct. The book is not mainly about his innocence. It doesn't hinge on it.

The problem being, he has not been charged or convicted of anything relating to Guy In Prison.

Ideally, Guy In Prison should simply leave well alone.

 

[quincy]

The other person is already named in an appeal, so it is not out of the blue. Other than that you are correct. The book is not mainly about his innocence. It doesn't hinge on it.

The prisoner can write his story, using court documents and news articles and any other supportable facts that state or implicate the other person in the murder. This is no different than any other "true crime" story that is written, except in this case it is written by someone who was charged and convicted of the crime.

And, just like any other true crime story written, what is written can result in a defamation lawsuit. Whether what is written can result in a successful suit will depend on how well the prisoner's statements can be supported by evidence.

There have been defamation suits filed against true crime authors in the past, with the "Fatal Vision" book by Joe McGinniss about the Jeffrey MacDonald murder case being, perhaps, the most famous. And, like the McGinniss/MacDonald suits which began in the 1980s, the litigation can be protracted and costly. MacDonald, I believe, still has a case in the courts today.

Recently there was a defamation case spawned by true crime book "Heart Full of Lies," by author Ann Rules. The book was about Washington state's Liysa Northon, a convicted murderer. This defamation suit was filed by author Ann Rules, however, over an article written by freelance writer (and Northon's fiancé) Rick Swart, that called Rules' book "sloppy storytelling." Although the case was dismissed this week, it is just one of many suits that have arisen over the telling of a crime where facts may be disputed.

The smart true crime authors write about cases where the "players" in the case are long-dead. Other authors must be very careful to publish only provable facts and pure opinion, or opinion supported by court records, police reports, official documents. These authors will also have liability insurance enough to cover the lawsuit or lawsuits that may arise from the content of their books.

The bottom line is that, yes, the prisoner can be sued. Books about real crimes tend to attract lawsuits. He should be prepared for the possibility.

 

[eerelations]

The bottom line is that, yes, the prisoner can be sued. Books about real crimes tend to attract lawsuits. He should be prepared for the possibility.

And being sued can be a very bad experience, even if one has no money to pay a judgment.

 

[RonNYC]

The prisoner can write his story, using court documents and news articles and any other supportable facts that state or implicate the other person in the murder. This is no different than any other "true crime" story that is written, except in this case it is written by someone who was charged and convicted of the crime.

And, just like any other true crime story written, what is written can result in a defamation lawsuit. Whether what is written can result in a successful suit will depend on how well the prisoner's statements can be supported by evidence.

There have been defamation suits filed against true crime authors in the past, with the "Fatal Vision" book by Joe McGinniss about the Jeffrey MacDonald murder case being, perhaps, the most famous. And, like the McGinniss/MacDonald suits which began in the 1980s, the litigation can be protracted and costly. MacDonald, I believe, still has a case in the courts today.

Recently there was a defamation case spawned by true crime book "Heart Full of Lies," by author Ann Rules. The book was about Washington state's Liysa Northon, a convicted murderer. This defamation suit was filed by author Ann Rules, however, over an article written by freelance writer (and Northon's fiancé) Rick Swart, that called Rules' book "sloppy storytelling." Although the case was dismissed this week, it is just one of many suits that have arisen over the telling of a crime where facts may be disputed.

The smart true crime authors write about cases where the "players" in the case are long-dead. Other authors must be very careful to publish only provable facts and pure opinion, or opinion supported by court records, police reports, official documents. These authors will also have liability insurance enough to cover the lawsuit or lawsuits that may arise from the content of their books.

The bottom line is that, yes, the prisoner can be sued. Books about real crimes tend to attract lawsuits. He should be prepared for the possibility.

Thank you. This is very helpful. I'm editing the book. I've changed a lot of names; not that they are germane to anything; it's just his story and how he has survived prison. The particulars of the crime take up on a small bit of one chapter and aren't referred to again. I'll change the names there, as well. There are court documents which names the other person but that is (I think?) not my problem.

 

[Proserpina]

The prisoner can write his story, using court documents and news articles and any other supportable facts that state or implicate the other person in the murder. This is no different than any other "true crime" story that is written, except in this case it is written by someone who was charged and convicted of the crime.

And, just like any other true crime story written, what is written can result in a defamation lawsuit. Whether what is written can result in a successful suit will depend on how well the prisoner's statements can be supported by evidence.

There have been defamation suits filed against true crime authors in the past, with the "Fatal Vision" book by Joe McGinniss about the Jeffrey MacDonald murder case being, perhaps, the most famous. And, like the McGinniss/MacDonald suits which began in the 1980s, the litigation can be protracted and costly. MacDonald, I believe, still has a case in the courts today.

Recently there was a defamation case spawned by true crime book "Heart Full of Lies," by author Ann Rules. The book was about Washington state's Liysa Northon, a convicted murderer. This defamation suit was filed by author Ann Rules, however, over an article written by freelance writer (and Northon's fiancé) Rick Swart, that called Rules' book "sloppy storytelling." Although the case was dismissed this week, it is just one of many suits that have arisen over the telling of a crime where facts may be disputed.

The smart true crime authors write about cases where the "players" in the case are long-dead. Other authors must be very careful to publish only provable facts and pure opinion, or opinion supported by court records, police reports, official documents. These authors will also have liability insurance enough to cover the lawsuit or lawsuits that may arise from the content of their books.

The bottom line is that, yes, the prisoner can be sued. Books about real crimes tend to attract lawsuits. He should be prepared for the possibility.

Somebody said Anne Rules' book was sloppy storytelling?

I thought truth was an absolute defense?

 

[quincy]

And being sued can be a very bad experience, even if one has no money to pay a judgment.

Generally lawsuits are bad experiences, win or lose.

What is interesting about true crime stories, however, is that many really good authors investigate a case more thoroughly than the police and prosecutors had the time or money to do. The stories that result can sometimes uncover witnesses previously unknown or facts not previously disclosed. The stories can shed new light on a case and, in a best-case-scenario for the convicted, could potentially lead to a crime reinvestigation.

Unfortunately, a prisoner serving time for murder is not the best author for these purposes and, if anyone reads the book, they can see anything written about the crime as only a self-serving denial of the author-prisoner's guilt.

Certainly having the prisoner eliminate from his book all mention of his crime (as RonNYC asked) would make the book less likely to attract a defamation lawsuit (depending on the rest of the book's content, of course), but it would probably also eliminate anyone's interest in reading the book (if the crime is one that anyone would be interested in reading about anyway - not all crimes, even murders, make good stories).



Edit to add: I just read your latest post, RonNYC. A prison-survival story may be of interest on its own even without detailing the crime which led to prison, if the story is written well enough.