Introduction
Jeffrey Masson, a psychoanalyst, served as a Projects Director of the Sigmund Freud Archives when he became disillusioned with Freudian psychology. He was then fired after he tried advancing his own theories (Masson v. New Yorker Magazine, 1991). Janet Malcolm, an author and contributor to New Yorker Magazine, recorded many interviews with Masson and wrote an article containing many lengthy quotes about his relationship with the Sigmund Freud Archives (Masson v. New Yorker Magazine, 1991). Masson had warned New Yorker Magazine’s fact checker Nancy Franklin about many inaccuracies, but the article was published anyway, even though some of the quotes were nowhere to be found on the 40 recorded hours of the interview by Malcolm (Sadler, 2005). On top of being published in the New Yorker Magazine, a book publisher who had heard about the allegations of inaccurateness still decided to publish the quotations into a book, further damaging Masson’s reputation. Masson then decided to bring an action for libel under California Law, saying that six of the quotations were defamatory and were not included in the 40 hours of the recorded interview material (Masson v. New Yorker Magazine, 1991).
Jeffry Masson filed a suit for defamation against New Yorker Magazine, claiming that publishing the so called fabrications had hurt his reputation. Defamation is defined as “a false communication that harms another’s reputation and subjects him to ridicule and scorn” (Trager, 2010, p. 52). The quotations that Masson was the most upset about were being called an “intellectual gigolo” as well as being called “the greatest analyst who ever lived” (Masson v. New Yorker Magazine, 1991). In court Masson was declared a public figure and had to ...
... middle of paper ...
...is a good idea to stay clear of anything involving actual malice, knowledge of falseness, and intentionally altering a statements meaning.
Works Cited
Kinkopf, N. J. (1991). Malice in Wonderland: Fictionalized Quotations and the Constitutionally Compelled Substuntial Truth Doctrine. Case Western Reserve Law Review .
Masson v. New Yorker Magazine, 89-1799 (The United States Court of Appeals June 20, 1991).
Polk, K. M. (1991). Inferring Actual Malice from Altered Quotations: Masson V. New Yorker Magazine Inc. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy .
Trager, Robert, J. R. (2010). The Law of Journalism & Mass Communication. Washington D.C.: CQ Press.
Sadler, R. (2005). Electronic Media Law. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc.
Villiers, M. d. (2008). Substantial Truth in Defamation Law. New South Wales: University of New South Wales.
A) McGeary, Johanna. McCarthy's First Slander. Time, 3/31/2003, Vol. 161 Issue 13, pA28,1/4p 1bw; (AN 9349282)
“NEW YORK TIMES v. UNITED STATES.” The Oyez Project. llT Chicago-Kent College Of Law, n.d. Web. 5 Dec. 2013.
``In criminal law, confession evidence is a prosecutor’s most potent weapon’’ (Kassin, 1997)—“the ‘queen of proofs’ in the law” (Brooks, 2000). Regardless of when in the legal process they occur, statements of confession often provide the most incriminating form of evidence and have been shown to significantly increase the rate of conviction. Legal scholars even argue that a defendant’s confession may be the sole piece of evidence considered during a trial and often guides jurors’ perception of the case (McCormick, 1972). The admission of a false confession can be the deciding point between a suspect’s freedom and their death sentence. To this end, research and analysis of the false confessions-filled Norfolk Four case reveals the drastic and controversial measures that the prosecuting team will take to provoke a confession, be it true or false.
Palmer, Elizabeth A. "The Court and Public Opinion." CQ Weekly 2 Dec. 2000. CQ Weekly. SAGE Publications. Web. 1 Mar. 2000. .
In this paper, I argue that courts should not treat civil parties in quasi-criminal cases the same as criminal defendants because character evidence can be misused as propensity character evidence. Part II of this paper discusses the bar against admitting character evidence. Part III deals with the split among courts as to whether this rule can apply in quasi-criminal cases. Part IV of this paper concludes that courts should resolve this split and refrain from treating civil parties in quasi-criminal cases as criminal defendants because the risk of prejudice does not support this use of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
On August 12th, 2004 New Jersey Governor James McGreevey became this nation's first openly gay state governor. Several moments after he stated, "I am a gay American", he succumbed to intense political and public pressure by announcing his resignation from New Jersey's most powerful position. This announcement and resignation came after a week of intense allegations that McGreevey sexually harassed a male colleague whom he had appointed. While American politics are not foreign to sexual scandal, the political destruction and individual defeat which McGreevey currently faces is poignantly unique. Throughout his career, McGreevey has been formally investigated for unethical political practices on at least 4 occasions. One of the current investigations includes allegations of fraudulent campaign finance practices and nepotism within upper end political appointments. Despite the severity of these allegations, it was the charge of sexual assault from a male employee that forced his resignation and retirement from politics. In order to understand the severity of the sexual harassment allegations against McGreevey, it is necessary to look at the situation through the eyes of Rubin and Foucault. Not only did McGreevey's actions reflect the social sexual hierarchy described by Rubin, but through his secrecy and discretion McGreevey disrupted the powerful discourse of his position with political and public realms.
The Plaintiff Falls argues that he is a not a public figure because he did not voluntarily thrust himself into public controversy over his termination. However, this is not the test. Rather, the test is if the title “sportswriter” earns him public figure attention for the purposes of commentary. According to the USA Today’s “cover story,” The Sporting News had a circulation of 700,000 in 1985. Due to this finding, Falls could not argue a claim for protection as a private figure, and thus, he is required to prove actual
Bonila, Denise M., and Levy, Beth, Eds. The Power of the Press. H. W. Wilson, 1999.
Rosenberg, Debra. “Michigan’s Day in Court.” Newsweek. 14 Apr, 2003. MSNBC Online. 20 Apr, 2003
Debated as one of the most misrepresented cases in American legal history, Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald still fights for innocence. Contrary to infallible evidence, prosecution intentionally withheld crucial information aiding MacDonald’s alibi. Such ratification included proof of an outside attack that would have played a major role in Jeffrey’s case.
Riordan, Kate. “Ten Angry Men: Unanimous Jury Verdicts in Criminal Trials and Incorporation After Mcdonald.”Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 101.4 (2011): 1403-1433. Academic Search Complete. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.
Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.
Hall, Kermit L, eds. The Oxford guide to United States Supreme Court decisions New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
pp. pp. pp Kay, H. H. (2004, Jan). Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Professor of Law.
Zelezny, J. (2011). Communications Law: Liberties, Restraints, and the Modern Media. Boston, MA: Wadsworth-Cengage Learning.