It isn't just a malicious statement. Otherwise Tabloids and every talking head would be out of a job.
It is a malicious statement presented as fact with the intent to do harm. Jokes, even bad ones, satire, and things like that don't count. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mary Jo Sminkey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > A malicious statement that causes harm to another comes under slander > (oral) or libel (written). It may or may not hold up in court, but > those are the laws that would govern it. I'm not sure you could defend > Imus' statement as "opinion" versus outright slander. To stand as > opinion it still needs to be something you believe as true...certainly > hard to defend calling them "hos" on that regard. You can also not > defend statements by saying they were intended as a joke, if anyone > other than the person being attacked found it defamatory, which was > certainly the case here as well. Again, it'd probably be hard to prove > this in a court case...because the law does put the burden of proof on > the plaintiff, and it certainly is a case that rides the fence either > way. But I do think it does meet the definition of slander regardless. > BTW - there are others that think the girls would have a good case for > slander...Newt Gingrich for one. Aggh, am I agreeing with Gingrich?? > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RVJQ Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:232496 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
