What if the libel source is illegal?

[KeyWestDan]

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

However, this issue of law would be the same any state I would think.



First a bit of background. A private citizen writes a letter to the editor listing a few reasons the State Attorney should not be re-elected. The State Attorney writes a letter but doesn't address the issues, but instead personally attacks the letter writer using information from NCIC that is 26 to 38 years old. Some of it is true but most of it is very false and horrendously defamatory.

The State Attorney was defeated. FDLE has the NCIC logs as does the plaintiff and the state attorney sent the letter on state time using state resources which amounts to a couple of misdemeanors. All well documented so no defenses there.

There are other defendants pretty much in the same boat. They have no defenses available except perhaps TRUTH.

If the defendants use the defense of truth, they have to prove the information is true. The plaintiff says it is false. The defense says it is true, so the burden falls on them.

Herein lies the rub and the question. The access to NCIC was a federal crime as well as the dissemination. There is no way the defendants can obtain the NCIC report (unless the defendant former state attorney kept it), but even in that case, it is a federal crime to communicate it. The FBI won't even admit the existence of a criminal record much less release it. The NCIC record can ONLY be used for legitimate law enforcement purposes.

Thus, the court could not possibly admit it.

So, the BIG QUESTION would be: How then can they prove truth if the source is illegal to have or to reveal?

If they have no admissible evidence, how do they prove truth?

Oh yes, this is a case of first impression. No court has ever heard anything this crazy before. It is actually crazier than just this.

 

[quincy]

KeyWest, I am assuming this is a hypothetical? I can't envision any editor allowing the State Attorney's letter to be published in a paper.

 

[KeyWestDan]

NOT hypothetical at all.

KeyWest, I am assuming this is a hypothetical? I can't envision any editor allowing the State Attorney's letter to be published in a paper.

It has been awhile and just stumbled across your reply. This is an ongoing case in Monroe County, FL. A related case has just been filed in U.S. District Court.

The newspaper was dismissed on the basis of "truth", which is a long absurd story in itself. The former state attorney is still a defendant.

The state attorney used NCIC and then documents that were in his file from a very old case where the jury had acquitted me in 15 minutes. His problem now is that the documents show on their face that the arrest was without probable case and the conviction was without any due process whatsoever. It was also for a civil municipal ordinance violation, so it is not admissible either as impeachment or probative per my reading of Florida law. How do they prove truth if the only evidence is not admissible and is a deprivation of due process on its face?

 

[quincy]

What you write is puzzling, KeyWestDan.

Those involved in this action do realize, don't they, that they can access their own NCIC records, upon request and with proper identification?

See http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fbi/is/ncic.htm.

If the key to this case is proving truth or falsity based on what is in an NCIC record, then that is not an impossible thing to do.


Edit to add: Could you provide a link to the case currently in the Court, or could you provide a link to the original newspaper where the letters appeared? It would help me to better understand what is going on here if these could be reviewed. Thanks.