Can a newspaper be held liable for reporting something that someone said which is defamatory?
Please be detail and relate to civil law term on fefamation act and the penal code.
Answers:
I dont believe so. Reporting news should not be a crime or carry penalties as long as they mention who did the defaming.
Rules like this would suppress free speech--which is one of our most cherished rights.
Not quite sure if the newspaper can be subjected to charges but I do believe the reporter can be held liable for defamation of character.
Under Section 499 of Penal Code, whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs, or visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person, intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person.
Thus, if there is evidence to prove that the newpaper "intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm", then it's can also be held liablilty.
A newspaper could only be held liable for defamation if they were to print something as fact when they knew it was untrue. As long as they report items as being suspected (which they will often do when they can't validate their story) there's no way for them to be held liable. Additionally, they have no obligation to verify the legitimacy of claims made by someone else. They can print third party quotes and opinions as much as they want. Think about all the letters to the editor printed by a paper which is essentially someone's opinion.
As to penal code, it would depend on the state you live in. Newspapers are protected by the First Amendment which would trump most suits you brought against them. If you truly have a problem try talking to the paper and see if they'll print your point of view.
No. But.
The newspaper tends to cover it's a*s by quoting other people. If it reported, for instance, that my neighbor said ," That Bruce Jenkins is a low-down child molester. He fondled my child and then fornicated with my dog," I could sue the neighbor. As long as the incident was provable, the information provided was untrue, and the end result was damage to my reputation.
Mind you, the damage MUST be real and provable. It must affect you in a real world way, such as your job or standing in the community (loss of church eldership, for instance). If this is just a tit-for-tat gossip session, then you will have a hard time making a provable case for damages. You may win the suit, but without any damages to you, the judge may award you .nothing. Or ten dollars.
As for the penal code, the only way a newspaper would suffer crimminal damages is if the intent was...crimminal. Fraud comes to mind as the only conceivable way this would happen, but you don't have a ghost of a chance convincing a courtroom that a newspaper was out to destroy you for any reason other than pure negligence.
Freedom of the press and freedom of speech are our Constitutional rights. It will be an uphill battle, and the burden of proof is on you. Furthermore, it would be an expensive fight. Remember, the press has a HUGE lobby, and even if they are a small newspaper, they could call for legal aid from many sources. So, unless you find a lawyer willing to work this case for free (very unlikely) or have very deep pockets...forget about it. You are better off just accepting that you got f*cked.
In any case, I wish you the best of luck.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Law Questions and Answers: