[The following brief response is for educational use and is not legal advice. You will need to contact a licensed attorney for that.]
There are insufficient facts to evaluate your case on whether there is defamation, intrusion, or interference with contract. However here is an explanation of possible claims you might make.
To make a successful claim at defamation you must show someone knowingly, recklessly, or negligently spread false information. If this false information were defamatory per se, (easily provable or disprovable, such as a direct accusation of a crime) you could win a substantial judgment for any presumed damages. If it were not per se, but instead regular defamation, you would have to show special damages (loss of a business contract, e.g.).
Since you were actually arrested and indicted upon an offense, it would be defamation only if it went beyond merely sharing that information. If the communique was false, such as accusing you of a more serious crime, or of being found guilty and convicted of the crime, it may be libel. However you did not state so and your original statement implied the messages against you simply reporting your own existing criminal record.
I would need to know the contents of the actual communique you claim has hurt your reputation. It appears if it is defamatory, it would probably be 'per se' as it is accusing you of a crime you have not been convicted of.
Assuming the communication in question is still truthful, there may be a claim for intrusion (invasion of privacy).
Intrusion can be one of four categories: 1) Assumption of your identity, 2) Disclosure of personal information, 3) Actual Intrusion (spying), 4) False light (exaggerating your plight negatively in a movie about you without your permission). In your case Disclosure and False light might apply.
Disclosure would generally not apply to public records, no matter how degrading the information (even rape victims cannot prevent this). Since your arrest is public record there is no disclosure offense. False light may be an option however it is not very common of a claim. It must be done with malice and be highly offensive. Both may exist here.
There is a third potential cause of action, the doctrine of interference with contract. It is a tort to intentionally interfere with a contract. This concept is still controversial in its application.
You would have to prove that someone willfully attempted to and successfully broke your business contract. If so, you could recover the lost money involved in your contract (and possibly other damages as well). However spreading information, even exaggerated, doesn't automatically prove someone willfully tried to break your contract. It also remains to be seen whether the actual loss of $ is significant enough to pursue the case.
Finally, all of these remedies may make your case sound more potent than it is. Once you give sufficient details the true issue and cause of action, if any, (and chances thereof) can be better known.
