Libel Case that confuses me

[filiain]

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

Ok, I am a journalism major in college and have studied libel law a bit, but there is one local case that has me confused and i hope someone can clarify it for me.

Earlier this year, the sheriff in a nearby county pulled over a woman. The woman files a report stating the sheriff did inappropriate things to her. An investigation was started into this mess. The local paper reported on this and the sheriff's denial of the actions. The investigation reveals that the sheriff did nothing and the woman was charged with filing a false report. This was also reported in the paper, in about the same place in the same size.

The sheriff then sues the paper for libel. It goes to jury and the jury awards the sheriff $1.1 million. During the case, the sheriff used the first 2 articles (the initial report and the piece about the investigation) and kept coming back to the point that the woman had lied in her report.

Can anyone explain what happened here? I thought public persons had to proove actual malice, which this man did not. Am I right or have my professors been lying to me?

Please help me understand this. It worries me because I plan to go into the journalism field and want to avoid getting into trouble like this.

 

[seniorjudge]

Earlier this year, the sheriff in a nearby county pulled over a woamn.

What's a woamn?

Anyway, has this case been appealed?

Can you give us any verification that this happened?

 

[filiain]

What's a woamn?

Sorry, it was meant to be woman.

Yes, it's been appealed, and I do have confirmation it happened. I've seen the original reports and was there for the press conference when the investigation came to a conclusion.

I was just wondering how you defend something like this. I mean, at the time of the first article, the report was taken to be fact. It turns out it wasn't. What is the defence that can be used here?

Sorry, but this case has my curiosity going wild.

 

[seniorjudge]

...
Yes, it's been appealed
...

Send me the cite.

 

[las365]

I mean, at the time of the first article, the report was taken to be fact. It turns out it wasn't.

Hmm. The fact that the report was filed by the complainant was a fact. The accusations contained in the report were allegations. If the paper printed the accusations as fact without taking sufficient care to point out that they were unproven allegations, that is probably why it lost.

 

[seniorjudge]

Hmm. The fact that the report was filed by the complainant was a fact. The accusations contained in the report were allegations. If the paper printed the accusations as fact without taking sufficient care to point out that they were unproven allegations, that is probably why it lost.

I want to see the appellate case first.

 

[las365]

yeah, I'm just speculating. This is interesting enough to rate a "homework rule" exception.

 

[quincy]

The defamation action was brought against the Terre Haute Tribune Star by Jeff Maynard, a law enforcement officer. Maynard was awarded $500,000 in compensatory damages and $1 million in punitive damages. The Tribune Star is appealing the decision, based on state and federal constitutional rights which allow the paper to report on a citizen's allegations brought against a public official. The Tribune Star believes that their report was truthful, fair and accurate.

I will go over the articles to see how Maynard could have won such a suit. I am surprised by the verdict.

 

[filiain]

Hmm. The fact that the report was filed by the complainant was a fact. The accusations contained in the report were allegations. If the paper printed the accusations as fact without taking sufficient care to point out that they were unproven allegations, that is probably why it lost.

Ok. That makes sense. Thanks. I'll have to remember that when I enter the work force.

 

[filiain]

Send me the cite.

I can't remember it. Sorry. I wasn't really paying attention when I was researching it.

 

[seniorjudge]

I can't remember it. Sorry. I wasn't really paying attention when I was researching it.

When you find out, let us know.

Journalists have extremely weak learning about the court system.

So don't rely too much on the way the case was reported in the media.

 

[seniorjudge]

Terre Haute News, Terre Haute, Indiana- TribStar.com - Tribune-Star launches appeal of libel verdict

The appeal has just now been filed.

It could be years before this is settled.

 

[filiain]

Thanks seniorjudge. I was just wondering a reason the jury would bring a judgement for the sheriff so I can avoid making the mistake the reporters at the paper made when I get out there.

 

[las365]

Ok. That makes sense. Thanks. I'll have to remember that when I enter the work force.

I was speculating! You should get the trial judge's ruling and read it.

 

[filiain]

I will. I wanted to see other people's ideas before requesting it. Sometimes, especially with the judge who presided over this, its best to go in with a few possible ideas. Plus, I wanted to get an understanding of how other people viewed the problem.