Below is the (fake) news story that accompanied our second assignment of the week. We were asked to evaluate the story and answer the following questions:
In your advice to the site, provide counsel on the following concerns:
- What type of libel plaintiff is the court likely to name Simmons?
- What, then, will be the requisite standard of fault in this case?
- Will Simmons be able to prove the requisite standard fault?
- Are there other defenses the news site might consider?
(This assignment is entirely fictitious; the names, places and events were invented to create the above hypothetical.)
_____________________________
Six people were killed Saturday night in a horrifying pair of alcohol-related crashes near Yankee Stadium after a sold-out baseball game. Five of the six victims had stopped to help after the first accident.
The accidents occurred about 11:45 p.m., roughly two hours after the Yankees’ victory over the Red Sox on a congested street near the Stadium. The identities of the victims had not been released by early December 3. New York Police Sgt. Rocco T. Ruggiero said that a white Ford Explorer ran a stop sign and pulled onto East 161st Street. The Explorer was likely coming from the stadium and alcohol was a factor, Ruggiero said.
The Explorer struck a silver Toyota Prius in the intersection. The driver of the Explorer that ran the stop sign was killed. Other motorists and one person riding a bicycle stopped to help.
A green Chevy van heading east then slammed into the good Samaritans and into both the Explorer and the Prius. Ruggiero said that the third motorist was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving and faces “more very serious charges.”
The driver was not seriously injured, and he was taken to a local hospital to be treated. Ruggiero identified that motorist as David Simmons, a 19-year-old Brooklyn College student from Queens, N.Y. whose address is a campus dormitory. Brooklyn College officials confirmed that Simmons is enrolled there as a student. They said he is a soccer player and the vice president of the campus chapter of SADD, Students Against Drunk Driving.
Five victims were pronounced dead at the scene; the sixth died en route to the hospital. Five of the six were males. Their ages were not released.
As authorities blocked off streets in the area, bodies lay on 161st Street covered with sheets. Robin Hubier was leaving her apartment on a bicycle when she saw the green van pass her. “I heard a sound and saw something, but that’s about all,” she said. As she pedaled closer, she saw that the van had hit people. “It’s a tragedy,” Hubier said. “All I can say is that it’s a damn tragedy. Whoever was driving the van was too much in a rush. I think people like that guy are just too stupid to know when it’s unsafe to drive.”
Simmons sues MyFacebookSpaceNews.com for libel per se, seeking $5 million in damages. Simmons said the story was libelous because it falsely reported that he was guilty of drunk driving and that it falsely portrayed him as stupid. Simmons said he was not drunk and that he’s not stupid. He said he majors in inter-disciplinary studies at Brooklyn College.
________________________
1. What type of libel plaintiff is the court likely to name Simmons?
Simmons is most likely to be named a private citizen by the court.
2. What, then, will be the requisite standard of fault in this case?
The requisite standard of fault in this case would be negligence.
3. Will Simmons be able to prove the requisite standard fault?
Perhaps. Simmons should be able to prove negligence by claiming lack of a thorough investigation and lack of verification of information. The reporter on the case could have easily determined whether or not Simmons was under the influence of alcohol when the accident occurred. The information would have been open record and it would have squashed any assumptions by the readers that Simmons was drunk at the time of the accident if he indeed was not. That information should have been available since the story was published the Wednesday after the accident (4 days later).
4. Are there other defenses the news site might consider?
The news site could argue that Simmons was a vortex/limited public figure. Simmons was known to be the vice-president of SADD and the accident he was involved in may have been alcohol related. The site could argue that Simmons’ ties to SADD (whether he was drunk or not) would create a public controversy and affect a large number of people.
Simmons would then be required to prove actual malice. This would be more difficult to prove because the news site didn’t actually say that Simmons was drunk when the accident occured, only that he was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving. It would be easier for the site to show the absence of actual malice. They would easily be able to find 3 sources to affirm that Simmons was indeed arrested under suspicion of drunken driving on the night of the accident. Whether Simmons was drunk or not, the site would have still been reporting the truth in their statement. However, I would argue that since the story was published at a later date, the reporter had time to confirm the details. Not following up with the arresting officer could be argued as reckless disregard for the truth.