_ Prof. Jonez _
2008-01-25 02:06:19 UTC
news:be001a1d-3200-4276-
defamation died with him.
The
Unauthorized
Biography
<snipped: possible copyright violations>Unauthorized
Biography
Now, we have already seen from Senator Mcfadden's speech to
Congress preserved in the Congressional Record the Federal
Reserve's role in transferring America's gold to Germany to build
up Hitler while they simultaneously created the great depression
and bankrupted this nation. And that wasn't enough. They stole the
farms and property of a great many American's through foreclosure
of mortgaged property by use of the artificially created
depression.
I have already posted links explaining this in great detail.
If the facts given in the fully referenced book here are false, I
Why then, has the Bush family dynasty failed to contest the
falsity by a lawsuit in a court of law that would certainly be
baised in their favor?
Deadrat?
*crickets chirping loudly now, fiddling their toes in anxious
anticipation*
;)
1. Prescott Bush died over 35 years ago. Any claims for hisCongress preserved in the Congressional Record the Federal
Reserve's role in transferring America's gold to Germany to build
up Hitler while they simultaneously created the great depression
and bankrupted this nation. And that wasn't enough. They stole the
farms and property of a great many American's through foreclosure
of mortgaged property by use of the artificially created
depression.
I have already posted links explaining this in great detail.
If the facts given in the fully referenced book here are false, I
Why then, has the Bush family dynasty failed to contest the
falsity by a lawsuit in a court of law that would certainly be
baised in their favor?
Deadrat?
*crickets chirping loudly now, fiddling their toes in anxious
anticipation*
;)
defamation died with him.
suit may be brought against someone who slanders a dead famous person.
statements to seek compensation from speakers. Criminal libel laws are different
in that they allow the state to fine or imprison speakers of defamatory
statements. Seventeen states currently have criminal libel laws.
Colorado
"(1) A person who shall knowingly publish or disseminate, either by written
instrument, sign, pictures, or the like, any statement or object tending to
**blacken the memory of one who is dead,** or to impeach the honesty, integrity,
virtue, or reputation or **expose the natural defects of one who is alive,** and
thereby to expose him to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule, commits criminal
libel.
(2) It shall be an affirmative defense that the publication was true, except
libels tending to blacken the memory of the dead and libels tending to expose
the natural defects of the living.
(3) Criminal libel is a class 6 felony."
Criminal-libel statutes, state by state
Compiled by Bill Kenworthy
and Beth Chesterman
First Amendment Center Online
08.10.06
Alabama
"Libel tending to provoke breach of peace.
Any person who publishes a libel of another which may tend to provoke a breach
of the peace shall be punished, on conviction, by fine and imprisonment in the
county jail, or hard labor for the county; the fine not to exceed in any case
$500.00 and the imprisonment or hard labor not to exceed six months."
Code of Alabama Section 13A-11-160
Alaska
No statute.
Arizona
No statute.
Arkansas
Arkansas repealed its criminal libel statute in 2005.
California
No statute.
Colorado
"(1) A person who shall knowingly publish or disseminate, either by written
instrument, sign, pictures, or the like, any statement or object tending to
blacken the memory of one who is dead, or to impeach the honesty, integrity,
virtue, or reputation or expose the natural defects of one who is alive, and
thereby to expose him to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule, commits criminal
libel.
(2) It shall be an affirmative defense that the publication was true, except
libels tending to blacken the memory of the dead and libels tending to expose
the natural defects of the living.
(3) Criminal libel is a class 6 felony."
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-13-105 (2005)
Truth is an absolute defense to a libel action. A defendant is not required to
prove the truth of the entire statement, only the truth in the substance of the
statement. Gomba v. McLaughlin, 504 P.2d 337 (Colo. 1972).
People v. Ryan, 806 P.2d 935 (Colo., 1991), upheld the Colorado statute to the
extent that it criminalized statements made by one private individual about
another private individual. The court also held that "actual malice" need not be
proved in cases between two private individuals.
Connecticut
No statute.
Delaware
No statute.
District of Columbia
The District of Columbia repealed its criminal libel statute in 2001.
Florida
Florida has created five separate libel-related crimes:
1.. Any individual who publishes a libel is guilty of a first-degree
misdemeanor. Fla. Stat. § 836.01 (2005). Additionally, when the libel is
anonymous or pseudonymous, the editor, owner, manager and/or publisher of the
publication in which the libel appeared may also be guilty. Id. at 836.03.
2.. Anyone who merely transmits libelous information to a newspaper is guilty
of a second-degree misdemeanor. Id. at 836.09.
3.. Libeling a bank or financial institution is a first-degree misdemeanor.
Id. at 836.06.
4.. Publishing a potentially libelous claim against an individual without
giving that individual's full name is a first-degree misdemeanor. Id. at 836.02.
5.. Attempting to extort a benefit from someone by threatening to publish a
libel concerning him or her is a second-degree felony. Id. 836.05
State v. Chase, 94 Fla. 1071 (1927), held that a prosecution for criminal-libel
must establish malice and that truth is a defense to a libel charge when that
charge relates to materials published about a public official.
Before a criminal-libel statute can be enforced, it must pass Florida's
procedural requirements. Prosecutors are required to notify a publication within
five days of when it is accused of libel. Id. at 836.07. Once notified, if a
publication can establish it printed the potentially libelous material in good
faith, it has anywhere from ten to forty-five days to publish a correction and
retraction depending on how frequently it is published. If a correction is
published, the charges will not go forward. Id. at 836.08.
Georgia
"(a) A person commits the offense of criminal defamation when, without a
privilege to do so and with intent to defame another, living or dead, he
communicates false matter which tends to blacken the memory of one who is dead
or which exposes one who is alive to hatred, contempt, or ridicule, and which
tends to provoke a breach of the peace.
(b) A person who violates subsection (a) of this Code section is guilty of a
misdemeanor."
Ga. Code Ann. § 16-11-40 (2005).
Porter v. Kimzey, 309 F.Supp. 993 (N.D. Ga. 1970), aff'd 401 U.S. 985, held that
the criminal-libel statute does not violate the First Amendment so long as the
provisions in the statute are precise and objective. However, Williamson v.
State, 249 Ga. 851 (1982), held that the statute was partially unconstitutional
because the language "tends to provoke a breach of peace" is vague and
overbroad. Yet in light of the decision, the statute has not been revised and
remains on the books.
Hawaii
No statute.
Idaho
Libeling either the living or the dead is a crime. Idaho Code § 18-4801 (2005).
"Every person who wilfully, and with a malicious intent to injure another,
publishes, or procures to be published, any libel, is punishable by fine not
exceeding $5,000, or imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six (6)
months." Id. at 18-4802.
Truth is a defense, which is to be determined by the jury. Id. at 18-4803.
"An injurious publication is presumed to have been malicious if no justifiable
motive for making it is shown." Id. at 18-4804.
It is not necessary that anyone actually have read or seen the libel. Id. at
18-4805. Each author, editor and proprietor of libelous material is liable. Id.
at 18-4806.
"True and fair" reports of public proceedings are not libelous, except upon a
showing of malice. Id. at 18-4807.
Libelous remarks or comments in relation to "true and fair" reports receive no
protection. Id. at 18-4808.
It is a misdemeanor to either threaten to libel a person or their family member
or solicit money in return for preventing a libel. Id. at 18-4809.
Illinois
Illinois law makes it a misdemeanor to defame or libel a bank or other financial
institution with the intent to damage its solvency; truth is an absolute
defense. 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. 300/1 (2005).
Indiana
No statute.
Iowa
Iowa has no criminal-libel statute, but the case Park v. Hill, 380 F. Supp. 2d
1002 (N.D. Iowa 2005), holds that Iowa law defines libel as "malicious
publication, expressed either in printing or in writing, or by signs and
pictures, tending to injure the reputation of another person or to expose the
person to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule, or to injure the person in the
maintenance of the person's business." Id. at 1015. Moreover, Art. 1, § 7 of the
Iowa Constitution provides that truth shall be a defense in all criminal-libel
actions.
State v. Heacock, 76 N.W. 654 (Iowa 1898), establishes that criminal
prosecutions for libel have occurred in Iowa. It does not give the elements for
criminal libel in the state, but the indictment in the case charges "that the
article was maliciously and willfully inserted in the [newspaper] by the
defendant, and that it was willfully and maliciously circulated and distributed
by him, 'for the purpose of defaming, injuring, and vilifying the person and
character of [the libeled individual] and others, and the same tended to provoke
the said [libeled individual] and others to wrath, and to expose them to public
hatred, contempt, and ridicule, and to deprive them of the benefits of public
confidence and social intercourse.'" Id. at 655.
Kansas
"(a) Criminal defamation is communicating to a person orally, in writing, or by
any other means, information, knowing the information to be false and with
actual malice, tending to expose another living person to public hatred,
contempt or ridicule; tending to deprive such person of the benefits of public
confidence and social acceptance; or tending to degrade and vilify the memory of
one who is dead and to scandalize or provoke surviving relatives and friends.
(b) In all prosecutions under this section the truth of the information
communicated shall be admitted as evidence. It shall be a defense to a charge of
criminal defamation if it is found that such matter was true.
(c) Criminal defamation is a class A nonperson misdemeanor." Kan. Stat. Ann §
21-4004 (2005).
The court in Phelps v. Hamilton, 59 F.3d 1058 (10th Cir. 1995), found the
statute required actual malice in matters of public concern and further held
that the statute was neither vague nor overbroad.
Kentucky
"Court may bring criminal action for libel or slander - Punish resistance to
judicial order.
Nothing in KRS 432.230 to 432.270 shall prevent any court or judge from
proceeding against any person writing or publishing a libel or slanderous words
concerning such court or judge in relation to his judicial conduct in court by
indictment, nor prevent any court from punishing any person guilty of a contempt
in resisting or disobeying any judicial order or process issued by or under the
authority of such court."
Kentucky Rev. Stat. Ann. 432.280
Louisiana
"Defamation is the malicious publication or expression in any manner, to anyone
other than the party defamed, of anything which tends:
(1) To expose any person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule, or to deprive him of
the benefit of public confidence or social intercourse; or
(2) To expose the memory of one deceased to hatred, contempt, or ridicule; or
(3) To injure any person, corporation, or association of persons in his or their
business or occupation.
Whoever commits the crime of defamation shall be fined not more than five
hundred dollars, or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both."
La. Rev. Stat. § 14:47 (2005)
Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 64 (1964), holds that the Louisiana statute is
unconstitutional so far as it punishes true statements about public officials
that are uttered with malicious purpose. Additionally, the statute is
unconstitutional in respect to its failure to differentiate whether false
statements against public officials were made with malice, reckless disregard of
truth or falsity, or in a reasonable belief of the truth of the statement.
However, Louisiana's statute is not unconstitutional per se as long as any
actual prosecutions under it follow the constraints laid out in Garrison. Snyder
v. Ware, 314 F. Supp. 335 (W.D. La. 1970), aff'd 397 U.S. 589. The Louisiana
statute still remains on the books.
Maine
No statute.
Maryland
No statute.
Massachusetts
"Libel of Groups of Persons Because of Race, Color or Religion.
Whoever publishes any false written or printed material with intent to
maliciously promote hatred of any group of persons in the commonwealth because
of race, color or religion shall be guilty of libel and shall be punished by a
fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than
one year, or both. The defendant may prove in defense that the publication was
privileged or was not malicious. Prosecutions under this section shall be
instituted only by the attorney general or by the district attorney for the
district in which the alleged libel was published." Ann. Laws Mass. § 98C
"Justification in Cases of Libel.
The defendant in a prosecution for writing or publishing a libel may introduce
in evidence the truth of the matter contained in the publication charged as
libelous, and the truth shall be a justification, unless actual malice is
proved." Ann. Laws Mass. § 8
Michigan
Michigan law makes it a felony to "willfully and maliciously" libel a bank or
other investment institution. Mich. Comp. Law § 750.97 (2005). It also is a
misdemeanor to falsely accuse another of a crime or "particular conduct," such
as lack of chastity. Id. at 750.370. The law also makes it a misdemeanor to make
a false or malicious statement regarding the financial condition of an insurer.
Id. at 750.389
Minnesota
"Criminal Defamation
Subdivision 1. Definition. Defamatory matter is anything which exposes a person
or a group, class or association to hatred, contempt, ridicule, degradation or
disgrace in society, or injury to business or occupation.
Subd. 2. Acts constituting. Whoever with knowledge of its defamatory character
orally, in writing or by any other means, communicates any defamatory matter to
a third person without the consent of the person defamed is guilty of criminal
defamation and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to
payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both."
Minn. Stat. 609.765
Also: Minn. Stat. 609.77 makes it a misdemeanor to pass false information to a
media source with the intention that it will be published and defame another
individual.
Mississippi
"Libel; penalty
Any person who shall be convicted of writing or publishing any libel, shall be
fined in such sum or imprisoned in the county jail for such term as the court,
in its discretion, may adjudge, having regard to the nature and enormity of the
offense, or be punished by both such fine and imprisonment." Miss. Code Ann.§
97-3-55
"Libel; truth as defense
In every criminal prosecution for libel it shall be lawful for the defendant,
upon the trial, to give in evidence the truth of the matter written or
published, and if it shall appear to the jury that the matter charged as
libelous is true, and was published with good motives and for justifiable ends,
the defendant shall be acquitted." Miss. Code Ann. § 97-3-57
Boydstun v. State, 249 So. 2d 411 (Miss. 1971). The Mississippi Supreme Court
noted that the criminal-libel statute makes it a crime to publish "any libel"
yet does not define libel. "No Mississippi case has redefined the crime in
understandable terms, and since the law must be made on a case to case basis,
the elements of the crime are so indefinite and uncertain that it should not be
enforced as a penal offense." Despite this decision, the libel statutes remain
on the books.
Missouri
No statute.
Montana
"Criminal defamation.
(1) Defamatory matter is anything that exposes a person or a group, class, or
association to hatred, contempt, ridicule, degradation, or disgrace in society
or injury to the person's or its business or occupation.
(2) Whoever, with knowledge of its defamatory character, orally, in writing, or
by any other means, including by electronic communication, as defined in
45-8-213, communicates any defamatory matter to a third person without the
consent of the person defamed commits the offense of criminal defamation and may
be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 6 months in the county jail or a
fine of not more than $500, or both.
Statute 45-8-212
State v. Helfrich, 277 Mont. 452 (Mont. 1996). Declared statute 45-8-212
unconstitutionally overbroad: "It violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments
of the United States Constitution as interpreted by the United States Supreme
Court in New York Times and Garrison and Article II, § 7 of the Montana
Constitution because, on its face, the statute prohibits truthful criticism when
not communicated for good motives and justifiable ends." However, 45-8-212 is
still on the books.
Nebraska
No statute.
Nevada
Nevada makes it a "gross misdemeanor" to libel the living through publication of
material that would expose them to ridicule, or to "blacken the memory of the
dead." Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.510. Similarly, it is a misdemeanor to furnish
libelous information to a newspaper or other publication. Id. at 200.550. There
is no "intent" requirement, but there is a defense if the information was true
and published "for good motive and justifiable ends." Id. at 200.510
"Any method by which matter charged as libelous may be communicated to another
shall be deemed a publication thereof." Id. at 200.520.
Editors and proprietors of published material may be held liable, but an editor
or proprietor may escape guilt by proving "that the matter complained of was
published without his knowledge or fault and against his wishes by another who
had no authority from him to make such publication, and was retracted by him as
soon as known with an equal degree of publicity." Id. at 200.530.
Nevada law makes it a "gross misdemeanor" either to threaten to libel somebody,
or to solicit personal gain in return for not libeling somebody. Id. at 200.560.
Note: In an unpublished order, federal Judge Johnnie Rawlinson approved an
agreement between the Nevada Press Association and the Nevada Attorney General
that the statutes would not be enforced because they were unconstitutional. In
Nevada Press Association v. del Papa, CV-S-98-00991-JBR (1998), the final
judgment stated that the statutes were unconstitutional because they were
overbroad and punished individuals for the publication of truthful statements.
New Hampshire
"I. A person is guilty of a class B misdemeanor if he purposely communicates to
any person, orally or in writing, any information which he knows to be false and
knows will tend to expose any other living person to public hatred, contempt or
ridicule.
II. As used in this section "public" includes any professional or social group
of which the victim of the defamation is a member." NH Rev. Stat. Ann 644:11
(2005)
In Keeton v. Hustler Magazine Inc., 465 U.S. 770 (1984), the U.S. Supreme Court
held that it was constitutional for residents and nonresidents of New Hampshire
to bring a suit under the statute.
New Jersey
No statute.
New Mexico
"Libel consists of making, writing, publishing, selling or circulating without
good motives and justifiable ends, any false and malicious statement affecting
the reputation, business or occupation of another, or which exposes another to
hatred, contempt, ridicule, degradation or disgrace.
Whoever commits libel is guilty of a misdemeanor." NM Stat. Ann. § 30-11-1
(2005)
State v. Powell, 839 P.2d 139 (NM Ct. App. 1992), held that New Mexico's
criminal-libel statute is unconstitutional as applied to public statements
involving matters of public concern. Under the First Amendment, a false
defamatory public statement which involves matters of public concern is subject
to a criminal-libel statute only if the statement is made with actual malice.
New Mexico's statute only requires a "malice" standard and therefore the court
held the statute could not be applied to cases such as those involving public
statements pertaining to matters of public concern because they required an
actual malice standard.
New York
No statute.
North Carolina
"If any person shall state, deliver or transmit by any means whatever, to the
manager, editor, publisher or reporter of any newspaper or periodical for
publication therein any false and libelous statement concerning any person or
corporation, and thereby secure the publication of the same, he shall be guilty
of a Class 2 misdemeanor." NC Gen. Stat § 14-47 (1993)
North Dakota
"1. A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if he willfully publishes
defamatory matter or knowingly procures such publication or in any way knowingly
aids or assists in the same being done.
2. It is a defense to a prosecution under this section that:
a. The matter alleged to be defamatory is true; or
b. The matter alleged to be defamatory was contained in a privileged
communication." N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-15-01(2) (2005)
Id. at (3) requires that the accused individual must have published the material
with either actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth.
Ohio
Generally, owners, licensees, and operators at television and radio stations
cannot be held liable for defamatory statements about candidates for public
office made during a broadcast from their station. Ohio Rev. Stat. § 2739.03
(2005)
If a broadcast station circulates a false statement, rumor or allegation about a
civil society organization, business, or public official or candidate for public
office, the station must run any rebutting statement received from the
individual or organization that was the subject of the broadcast. See Id. at
(C)-(G); see Id. at 2739.13-16 (2005) (establishing a similar duty for
newspapers).
A newspaper may not threaten a public official with publication of a defamatory
story for the purpose of influencing the official for or against any proposed
law, ordinance, or legislative act. Id. at 2739.18.
The punishment for these offenses is a fine of between $500 and $1,000, with
some of the more serious allegations also punishable by up to a year in jail.
Id. at 2739.99
Oklahoma
The state has promulgated four libel-related crimes:
1.. "Libel is a false or malicious unprivileged publication by writing,
printing, picture, or effigy or other fixed representation to the eye, which
exposes any person to public hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy, or which
tends to deprive him of public confidence, or to injure him in his occupation,
or any malicious publication as aforesaid, designed to blacken or vilify the
memory of one who is dead, and tending to scandalize his surviving relatives or
friends." 21 Okla. Stat. § 771 (2005). It is not, however, necessary that anyone
actually read or otherwise learn of the libel for a conviction to be secured;
mere exposure to the possibility of being read by another person is enough. Id.
at 776.
2.. Any person who makes a libel, willfully publishes one or willfully or
knowingly aids in the making of a libel may be punished by up to one year in
jail and/or a fine of $1,000 (and shall be liable in civil court to the injured
party). Id. at 773.
3.. One who "falsely and maliciously or falsely and wantonly" imputes
unchastity to a female is guilty of a crime, but one with much less severe
penalties: $25.00 in fines or 90 days in jail. In such cases, the state need not
prove the imputed information to be false; rather, the truth of the information
is an affirmative defense. Id. at 779-80.
4.. "Willfully, knowingly, or maliciously" spreading false rumors is also a
crime. Id. at 781; see Pegg v. State, 659 P.2d (Okla. Crim. App. 1983)
(upholding this statute as not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad).
A person who threatens to make a libel is presumed to have the same "intent"
(mens rea) as one who actually does make a libel. Id. at 778.
The truth of information published with "good motives" and "justifiable ends" is
a defense to libel. Id. at 774. An individual will not be liable for a statement
if the statement is privileged information that is published as part of a
legislative or judicial process, as part of one's official duties, or as a "fair
and true" report of the former. In the case of unprivileged information,
publication gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of malice. Id. at 772.
Moreover, even when a newspaper makes a "fair and true" report of one of the
above proceedings, if it does so with malicious intent, it can still be
convicted of libel - although malice will not be presumed from publication. Id.
at 777.
The Oklahoma statute contains the language "blackens the name of the dead,"
which alludes to a cause of action for a deceased individual or their relatives.
However, in Turner v. Crime Detective, 34 F.Supp. 8 (N.D. Okla. 1940), the court
held that a common law recovery for libel was not available to a deceased
individual nor could the deceased individual's estate or relatives recover for
the libel. The Oklahoma statute does not include language that expressly changes
the common law requirement that the individual be living nor does the statute
language expressly create a right for a deceased individual or their relatives
to recover for the libel. Therefore, the court held that in Oklahoma an action
for libel cannot be brought on behalf of a deceased individual. Nonetheless, the
statute language has remained unchanged.
Oregon
No statute.
Pennsylvania
No statute.
Rhode Island
No statute.
South Carolina
"Slander and libel.
Any person who shall with malicious intent originate, utter, circulate or
publish any false statement or matter concerning another the effect of which
shall tend to injure such person in his character or reputation shall be guilty
of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction therefor, be subject to punishment by fine
not to exceed five thousand dollars or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding
one year, or by both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court;
provided, that nothing herein shall be construed to abridge any right any person
may have by way of an action for damages for libel or slander under the existing
law."
South Carolina Code Annotated § 16-7-150
Fitts v. Kolb, 779 F. Supp. 1502, 1513 (S.C. 1991). "The plaintiffs contend that
the criminal libel statute does not pass constitutional muster because it is
both overbroad and vague. The court agrees in both respects." Despite this
ruling, the South Carolina statute remains on the books.
South Dakota
South Dakota has no criminal-libel statute but SD Codified Laws § 20 outlines
the definition of defamation and provides that "every person is obligated to
refrain from infringing on the rights of others not to be defamed." SD Codified
Laws § 20-11-1. Although SD Codified Laws § 20 does not expressly make available
a criminal prosecution for libel, Article 6 § 5 of the South Dakota Constitution
states that truth is a defense in criminal-libel cases. Additionally, a court
has held that it is possible that in South Dakota criminal-libel cases, the
defendant may not waive his right to a jury trial. State v. Thwing, 172 N.W.2d
277 (S.D. 1969); see SD Const. Art. 6, § 5.
Tennessee
No statute.
Texas
No statute.
Utah
"'Libel' defined
For the purpose of this part: 'Libel' means a malicious defamation, expressed
either by printing or by signs or pictures or the like, tending to defame or
darken the memory of one who is dead, or to impeach the honesty, integrity,
virtue, or reputation, or publish the natural defects of one who is alive and
thereby expose him to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule. Utah Code Ann.
(2007) § 76-9-501
Libel - Elements - Classification of offense.
(1) A person is guilty of libel if he intentionally and with a malicious intent
to injure another publishes or procures to be published any libel.
(2) Libel is a class B misdemeanor." § 76-9-502
In I.M.L. v. State, 61 P.3d 1038, 1048 (Utah, 2002), the Utah Supreme Court
said: "We hold that Utah's criminal libel statute, Utah Code Ann. §§ 76-9-501
to -503, infringes upon a substantial amount of constitutionally protected
speech by punishing false statements regarding public figures made without
knowledge or recklessness and true statements regarding public figures. The
statute is therefore overbroad and unconstitutional." Despite this ruling the
Utah statute is still on the books.
Vermont
No statute.
Virginia
"Any person who knowingly and willfully states, delivers or transmits by any
means whatever to any publisher, or employee of a publisher, of any newspaper,
magazine, or other publication or to any owner, or employee of an owner, of any
radio station, television station, news service or cable service, any false and
untrue statement, knowing the same to be false or untrue, concerning any person
or corporation, with intent that the same shall be published, broadcast or
otherwise disseminated, shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor." VA Code Ann.
§ 18.2-209. Speaking or publishing imputations of a woman's want of chastity is
also a Class 3 misdemeanor; if the defendant disproves malice, he will lessen
the penalty he will receive if convicted, but lack of malice is not a defense to
the crime. Id. at 18.2-417
Virgin Islands
The Virgin Islands has made libel a crime punishable by a fine not to exceed
$500, a year in jail, or both. VI Code Ann. tit. 14, § 59-1172 (2005).
Threatening to make libelous statement - or offering not to publish such a
statement in exchange for money or a favor - warrants a fine not to exceed
$1000, up to five years in jail, or both. Id. at 1179
"Injurious publications" are presumed to have been malicious. Id. at 1173. One
accused of libel "shall be acquitted" if it "appears to the court" that the
supposedly libelous material was "published for good motives and justifiable
ends." Id. at 1174. Guilt for libel extends to the owners, publishers, and
editors of the book, newspaper or other publication in which the libel was
printed. They may escape punishment by showing that the material was printed
without their knowledge, against their wishes and by another without authority
from them and that they objected to the material as soon as it was published.
Id. at 1176
"True and fair" reports of public proceedings are not libelous. Id. at 1177. A
communication between persons will most likely not be considered libelous if
there are reasonable grounds to suppose that there was not a malicious intent
behind the communication. Id. at 1178
Washington
Libel is a "gross misdemeanor" in Washington. Wash Rev. Code § 9.58.010 (2005).
"Publication" is defined broadly as the communication of any matter from one
person to another. Id. at 9.58.030. The editor, owner, publisher or manager of
the medium in which the libel appeared will be held guilty unless he can show
the material was published without his knowledge and against his will by one who
had no authority from him to select material for publication and that he
promptly retracted the libel "upon written request of the complainant." Id. at
9.58.040
Truth is a qualified defense; the accused libeler must also demonstrate "good
intentions and justifiable motives" or "belief in truth and fairness" of the
possibly libelous statement. Id. at 9.58.020. There are two categories of
communications which receive some protection from libel. First, unless
malicious, the report of any judicial, legislative or other public and official
proceeding is privileged. Id. at 9.58.050. Second, the presumption of malice
will not attach to the report of one person "entitled to or concerned in such
communication" to another similarly situated person. Id. at 9.58.070
Furnishing libelous information is a misdemeanor. Id. at 9.58.080. Threatening
to publish libelous information is a gross misdemeanor. Id. at 9.58.090
West Virginia
No statute.
Wisconsin
"(1) Whoever with intent to defame communicates any defamatory matter to a third
person without the consent of the person defamed is guilty of a Class A
misdemeanor.
(2) Defamatory matter is anything which exposes the other to hatred, contempt,
ridicule, degradation or disgrace in society or injury in the other's business
or occupation.
(3) This section does not apply if the defamatory matter was true and was
communicated with good motives and for justifiable ends or if the communication
was otherwise privileged.
(4) No person shall be convicted on the basis of an oral communication of
defamatory matter except upon the testimony of 2 other persons that they heard
and understood the oral statement as defamatory or upon a plea of guilty or no
contest." Wis. Stat. Ann 942.01 (2005)
"Giving false information for publication" is also a Class A Misdemeanor. Id. at
942.03
Wyoming
No statute.