Slander

[Tgo01]

Any of our lawyer types still around? Or anyone who happens to be an expert on slander?

Okay so here's the deal. Basically someone said something really fucked up about a family member of mine and I want to make sure everyone knows just what kind of asshole this person is so I plan on telling everyone I possibly can what this person said. I'm not going to go around telling everyone this person admitted to being a child molester or anything like that and I plan on telling only the truth, which is what the person said, only problem is of course it would be a my word against his type of deal.

I just so happen to live in one of the few states where slander is not only a civil matter but a criminal one as well. I'm just wondering if this person can actually try to claim I "besmirched" their good name and if so would the law even get involved and pursue this matter since it was just a conversation between two people that neither side can prove or disprove?

[waywardgs]

You want a lawyer to tell you it's alright to talk shit about someone?

[Tgo01]

You want a lawyer to tell you it's alright to talk shit about someone?

Yes. And if I can legally punch them in the nads and give them a wet willy.

[waywardgs]

As a fake attorney, I advise you to proceed.

[thefarmer]

Yes. And if I can legally punch them in the nads and give them a wet willy.

You might need to look into prostitution laws in your state too then.

[Rallorick]

take the high ground, and move your trailer to a new park

[Tgo01]

take the high ground, and move your trailer to a new park

Hey! None of that sissy talk or I'm going to sue you.

[Rallorick]

As a fake attorney, I advise you to proceed.

I may need to retain your services, good sir

[Back]

Find a forum this person uses and fuck with their quotes. You're good at that.

[Tgo01]

I'm a tool.

Thanks for your contribution, Back.

But you didn't tell me to encourage them to not vote, you're slipping.

[Jeril]

This has been a very boring thread, I was hoping for juicy slander about people we know.

[Tgo01]

This has been a very boring thread, I was hoping for juicy slander about people we know.

Well as soon as I get some legal advice here then I can proceed with the slander.

[Drew]

INAL but you can't slander someone with the truth. He would have to take you to court and prove that what you said was factually untrue, you'd have to pay to defend yourself though. It would probably help to know what state you live in.

[4a6c1]

It has to be harmful to their business practices, families business or "reputation" as that word applies to their means of creating income for themselves to matter in court. There is no court in the land that can protect you from taking potential income away from someone once you have "besmirched" their good name. I think this applies across state lines and internationally if a persons business is international and you harm it. This is Mrs. third person removed, giving you probably incorrectly worded advice I recieved from a corporate lawyer. Which is perhaps not applicable in this situation so take it as you will. Good luck with your besmirching.

[subzero]

Truth is an absolute defense and they'd have to be able to prove damages. I'd say you're most likely good to go.

[4a6c1]

That's not correct. Even if a thing is true, you need to have a legitimate reason for ruining their professional repututation (means to earning income), especially if the defemation seems to be an invasion of privacy or overreach of available information. For instance a rape victim can be taken to court for showing a phone video of her rape to the employer of her rapist, even if he was convicted. If he loses his job or is forced to move to find a job she may have to pay for those damages (all physical damages which can be proven with reciepts, hypothetically). Once again, I'm paraphrasing (actually, dated) information.

[Tenlaar]

How can it be slander if it is true? I find that hard to believe. The statement being false is in the very definition of the word.

[Gweneivia]

Similar to defamation is public disclosure of private facts, which arises where one person reveals information that is not of public concern, and the release of which would offend a reasonable person. "Unlike [with] libel, truth is not a defense for invasion of privacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

It's from wiki so it has to be true.

[Methais]

What I wanna know is how do the media and politicians always get a free pass on slander, especially during election seasons?

[Valthissa]

What I wanna know is how do the media and politicians always get a free pass on slander, especially during election seasons?

I thought we had discussed NYT v. Sullivan and actual malice before.

later, Hustler v. Falwell extended the principle to prohibit damages from 'intentional emotional distress'.

(I think the above rulings apply only to public figures, but that is the nature of your question)

[Latrinsorm]

INAL but you can't slander someone with the truth. He would have to take you to court and prove that what you said was factually untrue, you'd have to pay to defend yourself though. It would probably help to know what state you live in.I'll go one further: the truth is an affirmative defense. That sounds pretty lawyerly, huh? And that's where babies come from.

What's the worst that could happen, Terrence? You have to leave the country and spend some time languishing at your St. Barts estate again? They have wifi now.

[4a6c1]

St. Barts police is trained by our army so they cooperate with all bail enforcement. Also if you can't afford the resorts they kick you out. Are you trying to get him caught by the law?!

[Latrinsorm]

>:-D

[subzero]

That's not correct. Even if a thing is true, you need to have a legitimate reason for ruining their professional repututation (means to earning income), especially if the defemation seems to be an invasion of privacy or overreach of available information. For instance a rape victim can be taken to court for showing a phone video of her rape to the employer of her rapist, even if he was convicted. If he loses his job or is forced to move to find a job she may have to pay for those damages (all physical damages which can be proven with reciepts, hypothetically). Once again, I'm paraphrasing (actually, dated) information.

No. Me pointing out that a man is a convicted child molester is not damaging his reputation. He did that when he molested children and was found guilty of such. I can tell people about that all day long because it is true. If I were telling people that same story while the man in question had not been convicted of molesting children, I'd be in trouble because I'm now lying and deliberately attempting to damage his reputation.


How can it be slander if it is true? I find that hard to believe. The statement being false is in the very definition of the word.

It can't be. Like I said, truth is an absolute defense against libel or slander.


Similar to defamation is public disclosure of private facts, which arises where one person reveals information that is not of public concern, and the release of which would offend a reasonable person. "Unlike [with] libel, truth is not a defense for invasion of privacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

It's from wiki so it has to be true.

Way to leave out the important information:

Defamation is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation


What I wanna know is how do the media and politicians always get a free pass on slander, especially during election seasons?

Heh, it probably just sounds like a bunch of filthy lies, but since both parties know the shit being said it true, they can't do anything but fire back.