Ok everyone…a quick question. What is the difference between slander and libel?..Are these real crimes anymore?..Does anyone ever get charged?..Convicted? I’m going to a meeting in a few hours where a friend has been accused of dragging a student down the hall. So any quick comments or opinions would be helpfull. Thanks
I believe that one is written and one is spoken, but don’t quote me on that.
Slander is the spoken word; libel is the printed word.
Here’s mud in yer eye,
UncleBeer
Wow…that’s pretty impressive response time…ok, let me clear it up…I know that slander is a spoken statement, and libel is a written statement. I was wondering if these are things that are still upheld as “unlawful”
I don’t think either are crimes, but they are actions for which you can be found liable in civil court.
Uncle is right. Both are civil wrongs that can lead to a lawsuit. Defamation slander or libel) cases are filed every day.
Of course, “dragging a student down the hall” would potentially lead to other criminal charges and/or civil claims.
Thanks everyone…I’m probably more irritated about this than they are…I mean some snotty spoiled kid gets in trouble in class, then when he has to tell his parents about it, tacks on the “she dragged me down the hall” to make themselves out to be a victim. So the parents call the school board, and now there’s a big meeting about this at her school. Now this person would no more lay a hand on a student, than I would pierce my testicles. So I find the whole situation ridiculouse. These parents now are lucky I’m not a teacher, or every one of them would be in court for stuff like this.
Atrael, you might be interested in knowing that republishing (repeating) a defamatory statement is also actionable civilly. Wonder if the parents know that?
IIRC, the statement must also be untrue in order to be libel/slander. As an example, calling someone a liar and a thief would not be actionable if the accusation could be substantiated.
–
TMR
Yup, truth is always a defense.
One point that has not been made is that for people with public influence-celebrities, government officials, etc.-there has to be malicious intent. In other words, it has to be intended to defame them So if you thought that it was true, I suppose it is okay?
The facts, although interesting, are irrelevent.
Truth is, I believe, a complete defense (ie, no liability) in the US and Canada, but I remember reading about British law where truth is not a defense. Seems weird to me.
And if it’s clear that it’s opinion, you’re fine. I mean, saying you think a politician acts crooked is different from saying he is crooked. This isn’t as easy though, because it’s easy to say “blah blah blah, but all imho, of course”, so you might have to prove that it was opinion, or show some likelihood of that.
I think belief of truth plays into it, or at least can help determine damages, by showing that it wasn’t malicious.
Obviously, you must work for National Enquirer. Don’t you recall hearing of any of these suits (and even victories) against rags like this? Ya, these charges are quite real!
One more bit of esoteric ifo about this. Someone said libel is printed. True, but broadcast statements (radio, tv) are also dealt with under libel statutes.
Also, there was (still is?) a crime known as seditious libel. Usually invoked during wartime, it could cover things like printing or broadcasting troop movements, or anything derogatory about the government or the war effort. During WWI, many left-wing papers were hauled into court and charged with seditious libel, a criminal offense.
Free speech be damned, huh?
Just happen to have my handy Associated Press Stylebook with its primer on libel. Here are some of the relevant points.
Libel is an injury to reputation.
The only complete, unconditional defense to libel is that the facts are PROVABLY TRUE (their emphasis.)
For a statement to be libelous, it must be false, malicious, and damaging.
“Fair comment and criticism” covers the question of defaming someone in the course of offering opinion. It does not cover stating untruths. A bad restaurant review is not the same as saying that the restaurant had been closed by the Board of Health.
Public figures have an additional burden of proving that the false statements made about them were made with “actual malice” (that the publisher knew they were false, and printed it anyway.)
As far as slander vs. libel goes, it’s not spoken/printed, it’s more like transient vs. public record. Once a statement is written or broadcast, it’s out there for the public to jump on. Also, the standards for slander aren’t as severe, but neither are the remedies. For that reason, both plaintiffs and defendants prefer the cases be classed as libel.