Is it defamation/libel?

[Journo]

(General question regarding any common law jurisdiction):

I maintain a website writing about current affairs and events. Several months ago, there was an event in our city that the media only briefly touched upon, but then left everyone guessing.

I picked up on the story and developed some "what if" scenarios about the event and, by extension, the main person involved. I never wrote that the person was one thing or another (which other online writers, however, did).

Now someone claiming to be that individual is threatening to sue me for defamation over the article I wrote. I immediately responded and deleted the article in question and even offered the individual to tell his side of the story so as to dispell any and all doubts once and for all.

He has refused to do so.

Now my question is this: does this individual have a claim? From what I know about defamation and libel, I have done everything possible to accommodate the individual (1. remove the "offending" text and 2. offer him a chance to set the record straight, which would also serve as a retraction).

Since the media have gone completely hush-hush on the story, there is no way I can write a retraction on my own without running the risk of spreading lies, since the details are not available and the individual refuses to tell me his "real" story.

So, without knowing the details of what the authorities found out in the case (because the media keep quiet about it), I think I did all I could do: remove the article and offer the individual a chance to tell us the facts and what really happened.

My article was all about exploring possible scenarios, without reaching any final conclusion about the event or the individual. In fact, I even included a final sentence alerting readers to the fact that we need to hold off on such conclusions until all the details are fully known.

Any advice?

 

[seniorjudge]

Since you did not give any facts or details, all I can do is give you definitions.

 

[seniorjudge]

Definitions of libel on the Web:

* a false and malicious publication printed for the purpose of defaming a living person
* print slanderous statements against; "The newspaper was accused of libeling him"
* the written statement of a plaintiff explaining the cause of action (the defamation) and any relief he seeks
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

* In English and American law, and systems based on them, libel and slander are two forms of defamation (or defamation of character), which is the tort or delict of making a false statement of fact that injures someone's reputation. "Defamation" is however the generally-used term internationally, and is accordingly used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "libel" and "slander".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel

* Defamation of an individual or individuals in a published work, with malice aforethought. In litigation, the falsity of the libelous statements or representations, as well the intention of malice, has to be proved for there to be libel. In addition, financial damages to the parties so libeled must be incurred as a result of the material in question for there to be an assessment of the amount of damages to be awarded to a claimant. ...
www.brochure-design.com/brochure-design-publishing-terms.html

* Published words or pictures that falsely and maliciously defame a person. Libel is published defamation; slander is spoken.
courts.delaware.gov/How%20To/court%20proceedings/

* Written defamation that causes injury to another person.
www.rainwater.com/glossary/l.html

* Libel is written defamation; untrue words written down as opposed to said aloud.
www.iciclesoftware.com/vlh7/VLH7Glossary.html

* Arnold, FO The Law of damages and compensation. 1913.
www.bartleby.com/224/0400.html

* maliciously damaging someone's reputation in print, as in: When the book came out, the author was sued for libel by three different people.
www.business-words.com/dictionary/L.html

* use of print or pictures to harm someone's reputation. Until 1964, a person could prove that they had been libeled simply by showing that the statements in question were incorrect. In 1964, the Supreme Court decided that public officials had to prove that the statements in question were made with "actual malice"-for the purpose of harming the person's reputation. As a result of the Supreme Court case, Time, Inc. v. ...
www.historycentral.com/Civics/L.html

* Any written or printed matter tending to injure a person's reputation unjustly.
www.oneilandco.com/insurnce/trmnolgy.htm

* tones down dangerous statements.
www.afnews.af.mil/products/primer/tipsd9.htm

* Any false or malicious written or printed statement that publicly ridicules someone or damages their reputation.
www.usaaedfoundation.org/insurance/ins_home_glossary.asp

* Defamation by writing such as in a newspaper or a letter.
www.canadianlawsite.com/Dictionary_L.htm

* Malicious publication of a defamation of a person by printing, writing, signs, or pictures, for the purposes of injuring the reputation and good name of such person.
www.crfonline.org/orc/glossary/l.html

* Written and published or broadcast statement, which damages someone’s character (in a permanent form).
www.booksites.net/download/chadwickbeech/Glossary.htm

* Publication of defamatory information. Most General Liability policies cover libel.
www.insurancepoliciesonline.com/resourcecenter/glossary.htm

* A tort of defamation through published writings or pictures that are critical of the plaintiff. Compare with Slander.
www.iejs.com/glossary/Glossary_L.htm

* Published or broadcast communication that lowers the reputation of an individual by holding him or her up to contempt, ridicule or scorn.
highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0072492171/student_view0/glossary.html

* Defamation of person’s reputation or character by any type of publication, including pictures or written word.
www5.aaos.org/oko/vb/online_pubs/professional_liability/glossary.cfm

* A statement of a criminal charge.
hjem.get2net.dk/safsaf/glossary.html

* written defamatory statements about another.
www.patrons.com/html/body_glossary.html

* Libel' is the common term for 'defamation'. Defamation is the deliberate writing (libel) or speaking (slander) of untrue information about a person or corporation. Where the spreading of defamatory speech or material causes material damage to those it relates to they may seek legal redress for the damage caused. Libel, and how it is created and prosecuted, is a complex area of law. For the average person it is very difficult to prosecute. ...
www.fraw.org.uk/library/005/gn-irt/glossary.html

 

[seniorjudge]

Definitions of defamation on the Web:

* a false accusation of an offense or a malicious misrepresentation of someone's words or actions
* aspersion: an abusive attack on a person's character or good name
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

* In English and American law, and systems based on them, libel and slander are two forms of defamation (or defamation of character), which is the tort or delict of making a false statement of fact that injures someone's reputation. "Defamation" is however the generally-used term internationally, and is accordingly used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "libel" and "slander".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

* Defamatory speech distributed over the Internet can result in civil liability for the defamer and litigation against the WHP whose facilities were used to distribute the defamatory material.
www.layerblue.com/company/policies/terms/

* That which tends to injure a person's reputation. (See libel and slander.)
brandonlclark.com/glossary.html

* That which tends to injure a persons reputation. Libel is published defamation, whereas slander is spoken.
www.munley.com/legal_glossary_d.html

* Libelous or slanderous statements that cause injury to another person.
www.rainwater.com/glossary/d.html

* Written or oral statements made by one person to another, and made public ("published"), which tend to bring the character or reputation of that person into disrepute, or to expose them to unreasonable personal embarrassment. Defamation is called "libel" if it is printed and "slander" if it is oral. Truth is an absolute defense to defamation, and under some circumstances even untruths may be privileged and immune from liability.
www.iciclesoftware.com/vlh7/VLH7Glossary.html

* is the result of an attack on the reputation of a person or organization; it includes attacks on a person's honesty, integrity, or virtue which result in public contempt, ridicule, or financial injury.
www.hfac.uh.edu/comm/media_libel/libel/definition.html

* A communication that lowers the personal or professional reputation of a third party, ridicules them, or leads others to shun and avoid them.
www.parliament.vic.gov.au/sarc/E-Democracy/Final_Report/Glossary.htm

* Injury to a person's character, fame, or reputation by false and malicious statements.
www.adlergiersch.com/legal.cfm

* Any communication that holds a person up to contempt, hatred, ridicule or scorn and lowers the reputation of the individual defamed.
highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0072492171/student_view0/glossary.html

* Willful and malicious written (libel) or oral (slander) statement which is false and which damages another’s reputation.
www5.aaos.org/oko/vb/online_pubs/professional_liability/glossary.cfm

 

[seniorjudge]

Definitions of slander on the Web:

* words falsely spoken that damage the reputation of another
* aspersion: an abusive attack on a person's character or good name
* defame: charge falsely or with malicious intent; attack the good name and reputation of someone; "The journalists have defamed me!" "The article in the paper sullied my reputation"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

* In English and American law, and systems based on them, libel and slander are two forms of defamation (or defamation of character), which is the tort or delict of making a false statement of fact that injures someone's reputation. "Defamation" is however the generally-used term internationally, and is accordingly used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "libel" and "slander".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slander

* Verbal or spoken defamation.
www.canadianlawsite.com/Dictionary_S.htm

* The oral utterance or spreading of a falsehood harmful to another's reputation.
www.oneilandco.com/insurnce/trmnolgy.htm

* Slander is oral defamation, untrue words said aloud as opposed to written down.
www.iciclesoftware.com/vlh7/VLH7Glossary.html

* is a separate charge from libel; it is a false and unprivileged verbal statement which does not originate in print.
www.hfac.uh.edu/comm/media_libel/libel/definition.html

* False and defamatory spoken words tending to harm another’s reputation, business, or means of livelihood. Slander is spoken defamation; libel is published.
courts.delaware.gov/How%20To/court%20proceedings/

* the use of spoken words to harm someone's reputation.
www.historycentral.com/Civics/S.html

* Anything spoken about an individual that is false and malicious that ridicules them or damages their reputation.
www.usaaedfoundation.org/insurance/ins_home_glossary.asp

* Untrue spoken statement which damages someone’s character.
www.booksites.net/download/chadwickbeech/Glossary.htm

* Oral defamation by speaking or uttering false and malicious words in the presence of a person, other than the person slandered, which prejudices another person’s reputation and character.
www5.aaos.org/oko/vb/online_pubs/professional_liability/glossary.cfm

* Oral defamation of the reputation or character of a person, which could be the basis for a lawsuit.
www.peakagents.ca/glossary/s14.htm

 

[Journo]

Thanks for all that, but that's the stuff I know. All I can say is that my theories I developed and explored were not malicious. It was simply exploring theories regarding the event that had been in the news.

Also, as I said, I did include a caveat in my article warning readers against jumping to conclusions and that we had to wait for the results of the official investigation (which were never published).

 

[seniorjudge]

Thanks for all that, but that's the stuff I know. All I can say is that my theories I developed and explored were not malicious. It was simply exploring theories regarding the event that had been in the news.

Also, as I said, I did include a caveat in my article warning readers against jumping to conclusions and that we had to wait for the results of the official investigation (which were never published).

Okay.

If you don't want to give us facts and details, then we can't help.

Good luck.

 

[Journo]

Well, I have given you all the circumstances of this case. All I want is an objective assessment of such circumstances. If you are unable to give constructive advice based on the situation outlined by me, then, perhaps, you're not as knowledgeable as you pretend to be.

So, is there anyone out there who ACTUALLY has some advice and KNOWS what they are talking about?

 

[The Occultist]

Um, he really is an actual judge, and you have not really provided very much information for us, so don't you dare accuse him of being ignorant of anything.

I will leave it at this: truth is an absolute defense against libel, and as long as you have not presented anything as fact then you cannot be held accountable for anything. If you knew everything SJ has already posted, then you already know that, and nobody can offer further advice.

 

[Journo]

I have provided all the details without revealing the case itself, which is not my intention (for obvious reasons).

Again, for the simpletons, I have not made any statements, but only explored theories in my articles - I even made sure readers understood that we had to wait for the outcome of the official investigation in that case. All I asked for was an assessment by someone who has dealt with things like that before to see whether that nutjob actually has a case or not (I am beginning to believe that my theory developed for my article was not that wrong after all).