• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Is it libel?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

B

BNTM

Guest
What is the name of your state? TX
Public servant John was fired for sexual harassment and downloading pornography on a work computer. He appealed his firing in a civil service arbitration hearing. Immediately after the hearing concluded, a local newspaper editorial offered the opinion that John should not be reinstated. The arbitrator will issue a decision within the next several months.
Opinion is protected from libel, of course, and there was plenty of that. I also know that reporting statements spoken in privileged situations, such as court, are generally exempt from libel suits.
However, these statements appeared in the editorial: “But it is clear that, in a supervisory position, he made female employees under his direction feel uncomfortable with his repeated sexual innuendo....Further, the large number of pornographic downloads on his computer suggest a misuse of city time and equipment. The downloads indicate a pattern of misbehavior that cannot be tolerated. ...there has been no evidence that their [other employees] behavior rose to the same level of offensiveness as John’s”.
Here is what was entered into testimony during the public hearing: One female filed a harassment complaint against John and was the only one to testify. No other employees testified as to being harassed by John. In fact, four female employees said he was a good boss, and they had never been harassed by him. Rather, they had observed flirtatious behavior toward John by the complainant. Though it was alleged that John had told jokes or made comments of a sexual nature, no one could remember anything he had ever said to corroborate this. The remarks attributed to John by the complainant were not sexual in nature per se, but she “perceived” them to be sexual because she thought he was pursuing her romantically. (She didn’t really think this, but that’s a whole ‘nother part of the story--she had another motive for filing the complaint.)
There was evidence of sexually-graphic internet surfing on John’s computer, but computer experts on both sides said they could not definitively tie John to that activity. John’s computer was left on day and night, others had access to it, there had been other cases of persons downloading porn on someone else’s computers. In addition, there were a number of discrepancies in the department’s reporting of the number of downloads on the computer in question.
In every story carried by this newspaper, there were never any statements of fact such as those that appeared in the editorial. None of the editorial’s authors attended the hearing.
There are other interesting parts of this case, but those are the main things that appear to refute the editorial’s statements.
John, as a public figure, must prove the editors knew the falsity of these statements, or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. They did not find any of these statements in their own reporter’s stories or notes. They would not have even heard these statements if they had sat through every day of the hearing.
If these statements fall into the gray area of maybe-maybe not, is the following a consideration?
“The determination of what is fact and what is opinion (or “comment”) is made on the basis of the effect which the communications may reasonably be expected to have on its recipient. Although difficult to state in abstract terms, as a practical matter, the crucial differences between a statement of fact and opinion depends upon whether ordinary persons hearing or reading the matter complained of would be likely to understand it as an expression of the speaker’s or writer’s opinion, or as a statement of existing fact.” ...and... “a statement that a judge was “incompetent,” based upon disclosed facts or examples, was held to be constitutionally protected opinion, while a statement that he was “probably corrupt” was held to be a factual statement because it strongly suggested to the ordinary reader undisclosed factual “undertones of conspiracy and illegality.”
The editorial will have no bearing on the arbitrator's decision. He will rule on the merits of the case and the issues raised by the attorneys. John's reputation--what was left of it after the allegations--is now completely in shreds after the editorial. It may just be unfair that the newspaper did this prior to a ruling in the case, but libel laws do exist for a reason. I just wonder if this is one?
So, a lengthy post to a simple question--is this worth pursuing?
 


HomeGuru

Senior Member
BNTM said:
What is the name of your state? TX
Public servant John was fired for sexual harassment and downloading pornography on a work computer. He appealed his firing in a civil service arbitration hearing. Immediately after the hearing concluded, a local newspaper editorial offered the opinion that John should not be reinstated. The arbitrator will issue a decision within the next several months.
Opinion is protected from libel, of course, and there was plenty of that. I also know that reporting statements spoken in privileged situations, such as court, are generally exempt from libel suits.
However, these statements appeared in the editorial: “But it is clear that, in a supervisory position, he made female employees under his direction feel uncomfortable with his repeated sexual innuendo....Further, the large number of pornographic downloads on his computer suggest a misuse of city time and equipment. The downloads indicate a pattern of misbehavior that cannot be tolerated. ...there has been no evidence that their [other employees] behavior rose to the same level of offensiveness as John’s”.
Here is what was entered into testimony during the public hearing: One female filed a harassment complaint against John and was the only one to testify. No other employees testified as to being harassed by John. In fact, four female employees said he was a good boss, and they had never been harassed by him. Rather, they had observed flirtatious behavior toward John by the complainant. Though it was alleged that John had told jokes or made comments of a sexual nature, no one could remember anything he had ever said to corroborate this. The remarks attributed to John by the complainant were not sexual in nature per se, but she “perceived” them to be sexual because she thought he was pursuing her romantically. (She didn’t really think this, but that’s a whole ‘nother part of the story--she had another motive for filing the complaint.)
There was evidence of sexually-graphic internet surfing on John’s computer, but computer experts on both sides said they could not definitively tie John to that activity. John’s computer was left on day and night, others had access to it, there had been other cases of persons downloading porn on someone else’s computers. In addition, there were a number of discrepancies in the department’s reporting of the number of downloads on the computer in question.
In every story carried by this newspaper, there were never any statements of fact such as those that appeared in the editorial. None of the editorial’s authors attended the hearing.
There are other interesting parts of this case, but those are the main things that appear to refute the editorial’s statements.
John, as a public figure, must prove the editors knew the falsity of these statements, or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. They did not find any of these statements in their own reporter’s stories or notes. They would not have even heard these statements if they had sat through every day of the hearing.
If these statements fall into the gray area of maybe-maybe not, is the following a consideration?
“The determination of what is fact and what is opinion (or “comment”) is made on the basis of the effect which the communications may reasonably be expected to have on its recipient. Although difficult to state in abstract terms, as a practical matter, the crucial differences between a statement of fact and opinion depends upon whether ordinary persons hearing or reading the matter complained of would be likely to understand it as an expression of the speaker’s or writer’s opinion, or as a statement of existing fact.” ...and... “a statement that a judge was “incompetent,” based upon disclosed facts or examples, was held to be constitutionally protected opinion, while a statement that he was “probably corrupt” was held to be a factual statement because it strongly suggested to the ordinary reader undisclosed factual “undertones of conspiracy and illegality.”
The editorial will have no bearing on the arbitrator's decision. He will rule on the merits of the case and the issues raised by the attorneys. John's reputation--what was left of it after the allegations--is now completely in shreds after the editorial. It may just be unfair that the newspaper did this prior to a ruling in the case, but libel laws do exist for a reason. I just wonder if this is one?
So, a lengthy post to a simple question--is this worth pursuing?
**A: you already posted a thread on this same subject.
 
H

hexeliebe

Guest
Why are you starting a new thread when this is the exact same subject of your earlier thread?

And the issues have not changed.

One female filed a harassment complaint against John and was the only one to testify. No other employees testified as to being harassed by John.
Irrelevant

In fact, four female employees said he was a good boss, and they had never been harassed by him. Rather, they had observed flirtatious behavior toward John by the complainant.
Irrelevant

In every story carried by this newspaper, there were never any statements of fact such as those that appeared in the editorial.
Irrelevant

None of the editorial’s authors attended the hearing.
And you know this how? Still Irrelevant

They did not find any of these statements in their own reporter’s stories or notes.
And you've seen the reporter's notebooks? You've interviewed every reporter onstaff and they've let you look at their notebooks?

Regardless, still Irrelevant.
 
B

BNTM

Guest
My first thread was public v private figure question-- I posted a separate thread because this concerns whether the statements constitute libel. Sorry-- I wasn't trying to complicate things.
 
B

BNTM

Guest
Now guys, don't turn on me. Remember the holiday spirit? Do you want me to explain myself here or on the other thread? I'm at your mercy.
 
B

BNTM

Guest
tsk, tsk... no patience in this forum, is there? Cut me some slack here. (And I'm not a "him"... I'm a "her")
I'm just trying to ask if any of you think the editorial's statements could be libelous?
If they said "women" were made to feel uncomfortable, but only one female made a complaint, isn't that a false statement of fact?
 
H

hexeliebe

Guest
You have the answers in this and the other thread.

Read them M'am :D
 
B

BNTM

Guest
Okay, I'm obviously dense and a glutton for punishment, because ya'll are going to gang up on me for pursuing this, but I'm in a forgiving mood, even if you're not...I like to know the "why" behind things.
I understand the irrelevance of whether they attended the hearing.
What I don't understand is why you say it's irrelevant that the statements they published cannot be backed up by fact. If you're trying to prove libel, why aren't the disputed statements relevant? What else do you use to support your claim if you can't use the statements at issue?
Their opinions don't have to be supported by fact, but I always thought statements presented as fact should be supported and verifiable. Truth is the best defense, and there is no truth supporting these particular statements.
 
H

hexeliebe

Guest
If you're trying to prove libel, why aren't the disputed statements relevant? What else do you use to support your claim if you can't use the statements at issue?
Look at this part of your post then at the nature and the context of the statements made and the vehicle they were made in and then you'll find your answer.
 
B

BNTM

Guest
Okay, professor, I'm trying really hard to get it. Are you saying because the statements were made within the context of an opinion article, they fall under the cloak of that protection?
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top