Defamation

Steak4dinner

Hi guys

This is kind of hard to right but last week I pled guilty to two different charges in court. Serious charges that bring me great shame.

The clerk just read out the charges and I pled guilty. No details were given about said charges, just the charges themselves and the Act.

Two local papers reported the story (as expected). One reported with meticulous accuracy. I have no qualms with it. Free press and open court and all that jazz.

However the second paper (its headline and the first two lines) is grossly distorted. To the degree that I am too afraid to leave my house and my parents are struggling.

I will try to explain it this way. Think of one of the charges being something on a spectrum. My crime would be on the very mild side whereas the papers accusations are on the very severe side.

The story was not just on the paper but it was on their social media sight also. Social media shared it like wild fire and I am getting awful abuse and the bit of mental health I have left is in tatters.

Because I committed a crime and my reputation is low on its own merits, do I have any recourse on this?

It was published

It was false

It was viewed/read/shared by a huge amount of people.

But again my reputation would be lowered because I did commit a crime anyway. Does that mean they can make stuff up and get away with it?

This is not about money. I deserve to be in the papers but I just wanted fairness. They have published a severe accusation about me which will be forever viewed online and is going to cause me significant damage.

What can I do? A retraction or apology seems like its too little too late but if that's the best I can do then that's what I will do.

Please do not think this is a money grab in action. I'm not that type of person. I just feel for my parents. I have put them through hell as it is but this has affected them as much as me.

whippet

you won't get anything worth while here as we don't have the context / details and legal advise isn't allowed. If you were in court you may have a solicitor already who knows the details and the context ... it might be a start for you to contact them to see if there is something that you can do with regards the reporting

Uncle Pierre

As stated above - impossible to answer here without the details. And am not asking you to reveal them. But just to answer two of your questions:

• no, the fact that you were in court does not mean that "they can make stuff up and get away with it"
• yes, if their report was grossly inaccurate, you may have cause for action.

As also stated above, your best bet is to speak to a solicitor.

Losty Dublin

Assuming they are aligned and members of the Press Council of Ireland then you may choose to file a complaint with them. The details are on their website along with instructions on what to do, and thankfully the service is free.

You do need to be quick; the time limit is 3 months from the date of publication.

Liberty_Bear

By way of information and specifically that, there is a good summary of the law here

https://www.lawyer.ie/defamation/

If you are needing legal assistance perhaps contact the Free Legal Advice Centre whom might be able to help

maestroamado

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058231802/defamation

I expect the only option is appeal to higher court.. you pleaded guilty it seems to all offenses under the act so they likely can write what they like...

I am pretty sure that any court information cannot be used in another case...

ohnonotgmail

Did the paper say that the actions you committed were an offence at the higher end of the spectrum or did it say what the spectrum of that offence involves? they are very different things.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118602147#Comment_118602147

This makes no sense whatsoever

maestroamado

What part are unable to understand...

road_high

Unfortunately once stories are in the public realm via court papers will twist and write about them in many ways, sensationalism sells.

I don’t think there’s much you can do apart from learn from the experience. This will blow over quickly and it’s onto the next story. Best avoid all social media in the mean time

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118604509#Comment_118604509

All of it......

Because it doesn't make sense

maestroamado

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118604546#Comment_118604546

Explain what you mean if you think it doesn't make sense...

😂😂

maestroamado

Yes mut...

maestroamado

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118604585#Comment_118604585

not so much that it doesn't make sense in itself but it makes no sense in relation to the question asked by the OP.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118601815#Comment_118601815

It might be best not to stoke the hornets nest- when the paper gets wind of it, there’ll be another big headline. While it may be “unfair” op, and maybe you have a “case” I’d think carefully how you translate that into action- while story will remain online, people will go back to living their own lives soon enough - sensationalism sells newspapers and that’s possibility what you experienced- you need less publicity now not more- by all means consult with a solicitor but depending on the nature of your crime, that paper may choose to make an even bigger story of your complaint- you’re trying to manage your footnote of history while the public have already made up their minds- I don’t think you’ll receive much satisfaction regardless of how “right” you are.

28064212

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118602147#Comment_118602147

Yeah, that makes no sense. What it sounds like you're saying: If I plead guilty to an assault charge where I was in a scuffle at 4am after the nightclub closed, the paper can make up some story about an unprovoked attack on a disabled orphan in broad daylight. Or they can say that I assaulted someone so badly that I broke three of their ribs, a leg, and crippled them for life, even though in reality they got a light bruise on their cheek

Gregor Samsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118604585#Comment_118604585

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118602147#Comment_118602147

None of your post makes sense. Here's the breakdown:

I expect the only option is appeal to higher court.

Makes no sense. OP isn't talking about an appeal. They are asking is they anything that can be done about an alleged defamation. There is, but that wouldn't involve an appeal to a higher court - it would involve them bringing a separate legal case.

you pleaded guilty it seems to all offenses under the act so they likely can write what they like...

Makes no sense. If the OP pled guilty to speeding at 60km/h on a country road, the paper couldn't claim that they were doing 150km/h though a housing estate.

I am pretty sure that any court information cannot be used in another case...

Makes no sense. Why would you not be able to bring up something from the case that convicted you in a defamation case about your conviction? They're two separate cases. The first, I can only assume from the details given, is a criminal one taken against the OP. The second would be a civil one taken by the OP against someone else.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118604727#Comment_118604727

But if you were caught with say a "personal amount" of drugs and the newpaper lead with a heading of "Local man Jimmy Murphy pleads guilty to drugs involvement after Garda search uncovers large stash of cocaine" then it might be a misleading but I doubt you would get a lot of traction on it. You might be able to make a complaint and have a clarifying statement printed in the paper. Which could lead to a bit of a Barbara Streisand effect anyway.

There was the case a while back of a man who took a paper to court for naming him in a court case that he wasn't involved in. I think he lost. There was a man with the same name convicted but I think they printed the name with the location of the innocent fella.

Factual accounts and tabloid like accounts of news items usually only differ in their headline coupled with some choice adjectives of the perpetrator- the reported facts tend to be quite similar but the tabloid version quite often will put additional things in like “community up in arms” “ people don’t feel safe because this person is around” etc

Regardless of lower end or higher end of the scale OP you did mention that the crime itself was “serious” , and even though “lower end of scale”, the crime itself appears to come with an instant major social stigma given your account of the reaction in your community. Maybe ask yourself, is it the account in the newspaper or the nature of the crime itself that has people that way?

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118604753#Comment_118604753

if somebody was caught with a personal amount and paper claimed that there was a large stash of cocaine the paper would lead themselves open to a case for defamation. It certainly meets the general standard for defamation

The statement made was false

The statement was either published or spoken and a third party had read or heard the statement. The reason for this is because if nobody reads or hears the defamatory statement then it cannot damage a person’s reputation. If the statement was heard or read by one person, it can be assumed that it would also be heard by further parties.

The language used, the meaning of the statement could have an adverse effect on a person’s reputation.

A specific person can be recognised or identified by reading the statement. If the victim is clearly referenced in the defamatory statement then it could have an impact on their reputation.

Uncle Pierre

IANAL but I have several years' experience in the newspaper industry, including courts coverage as both a reporter and editor.

Much of what's been said above is either irrelevant, inacurrate, or both. For example, it is manifestly not the case that a newspaper "can likely write what they want" if somebody pleads guilty to an offence.

Also, if OP were to take any action, it's extremely unlikely that any newspaper would counter with further stories along the lines of "Joe Bloggs challenges the accuracy of our court report". They won't want it known that their report is being called into question, as there'd be even more egg on their face if things went against them. If Joe Bloggs is successful, they'll just print whatever retraction/clarification/apology they're obliged to carry; if Joe Bloggs is unsuccessful, most likely scenario is that there won't be a word about it.

Again, without knowing the details, and on the continued assumption that OP won't want to divulge them, impossible to give any specifics in opinion here. It remains the case that OP's best course of action is to speak to a solicitor.

Uncle Pierre

Anyway, for what it's worth, and purely for illustrative purposes:

Let's say picking your nose in public is generally regarded by society as the most heinous crime of all. Offences under the Picking Your Nose in Public Act might range from relatively mild (like moving a finger towards your nose as though you're going to pick it, but moving it away again as you change your mind), to more serious (like having a good old root around up there, and then rubbing your finger down the face of somebody else).

Joe Bloggs is twice caught doing the first of those, is brought to court, and pleads guilty, with no specific details of the offences being given there.

A paper reports "Joe Bloggs pleaded guilty to two offences under the Picking Your Nose in Public Act". This is accurate and it's highly unlikely there'd be a finding of defamation. The fact that people might assume that he picked his nose in public when he never actually did so is neither here nor there, as the offences he admits to would still fall under the Act.

However, if a paper were instead to report "Joe Bloggs twice picked his nose in public", a different situation arises, and a defamation action would likely have a different result.

Again, IANAL, but posts here are based on many years of dealing with such things from a newspaper point of view.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118605834#Comment_118605834

The Daily Mail were quite happy to keep prodding away at Meagan and Harry throughout their court battles so I don’t agree with you that papers won’t retaliate, especially if it’s concerning a crime that easily fuels the emotions of its readers. It’s obvious that the OP is now quite low on social acceptability and that may be simply due to the nature of the crime regardless of how it was reported.

As I pointed out earlier, newspapers tend in the main to report accurately- either tabloid or broadsheet-I think this instance may well be more related to sensationalist headlines and reporting style as opposed to defamatory content per se. And if this is the case, and that no defamatory element exists in the news story, then the OP risks further ridicule.

Uncle Pierre

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118605967#Comment_118605967

With all due respect, there's a massive difference between the practices of the Daily Mail and the practices of local newspapers in Ireland. And remember the OP specified it's a local paper's coverage that they have an issue with.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118606267#Comment_118606267

Fair point- and while I’m not going to speculate on the crime of the OP, I notice they point out at the 2nd newspaper “headline and first two lines” “grossly distorted” -to the degree they feel they can’t leave their house.

It doesn’t sound like inaccurate reporting per se- it sounds like they’ve labelled or described the OP in their headline article in some way in which the OP feels is derogatory or inaccurate to them, but may in fact be true, based on their crime or activity, regardless of how low down on the spectrum it may be. You can hit someone unprovoked for example, cause only minor injury to that person, and still be called a violent thug - maybe the OP resents whatever label the newspaper has placed on them- that was all I was pointing out really- trying to dispute this or make a formal complaint about it to the newspaper may well bring further anxst so it’s worth considering the implications.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118605298#Comment_118605298

1) Give me the legal definition of "large". "Jimmy Murphys was arrested with a large amount of cocaine" - what does that mean? 10g, 10kg, 100kg? "Jimmy Murphy died after ingesting a large amount of cocaine" - what does that mean 10g, 10kg, 100kg?

2) To prove defamation you have to show that the alleged transgression caused your reputation harm. The standard for that is in the eyes of the reasonable person. Given that Jimmy was caught and convicted of possessing cocaine, would his reputation be lowered by describing the amount as "large" in a newspaper heading? The starting point for his reputation is that he has already been convicted of possession. Does describing it with the subjective adjective "large" diminish his reputation versus calling it "small"? That is what you would need to convince the court.

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118606594#Comment_118606594

I am sure it would be relatively straightforward to convince a court of that. or rather convince a jury as it is a jury that decides in defamation cases.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118606607#Comment_118606607

They don't have to be. A jury can be requested in the High Court for a defamation case.

If I hear my neighbour is convicted of possession of cocaine then his reputation is diminished in my eyes. If the newspaper article describes it as a "large" amount, it doesn't further add to it.

How much is "large" to you?

ohnonotgmail

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118606625#Comment_118606625

and any smart plaintiff will request one. how it appears to you personally doesn't massively matter.