Is it slander if you make a post detailing a incident, and then in the next paragraph explain another incident involving "someone", without mentioning their name, dates, times, or specific places? And the two incidences were referred to as a coincidence, but not outright saying that the person did anything, just implying?
2007-01-20 17:50:29 · 11 answers · asked by Momof3boys 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
So even if no names where used it would still be considered slander?
2007-01-20 18:00:43 · update #1
Does it help if I have proof to back everything up if I was ever brought to court?
2007-01-20 18:01:18 · update #2
I just want to make sure that I protect myself and I do not have the intention to slander, but to tell the facts of a really horrible animal cruelty incident that happened recently.
2007-01-20 18:10:20 · update #3
No. It's not slander. Anything written is called libel.
Furthermore, if there are no names and identify characteristics mentioned, no one has a case against you.
2007-01-20 17:54:43 · answer #1 · answered by pinwheelbandit 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Slander = False and defamatory spoken words tending to harm another’s reputation, business, or means of livelihood. Slander is spoken defamation; libel is published.
Soo... no, it would not be slander, maybe libel. If the person never wrote a name in association to the incident though it can't really be seen as directly harming your reputation unless the readers of the post already know who is being spoken about. Also, it's only slander if the facts are untrue (defamation= a false accusation of an offense or a malicious misrepresentation of someone's words or actions) or if you can proove that there was malicious misrepresentation of your words.
Personally, I think people use the term "slander" too often to cover up things that they would rather not have seen made public - but that's where freedom of speech comes in.
2007-01-20 18:00:26 · answer #2 · answered by ggs1982 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Implying that someone did something can be slander. Not naming that person specifically can be slander, but only if folks who care can actually determine who the person is that you are speaking about. The person being slandered has to prove he was damaged somehow, too, unless you suggest the person committed a serious crime, has a loathsome disease, is conducting himself in such a way that is incompatible with the the person's business, trade or profession, or engaged in serious sexual misconduct. If the incident suggests one of those things, then damages are presumed. Someone has to read the posts as well.
Note that truth is a defense to a slander lawsuit.
2007-01-20 18:05:11 · answer #3 · answered by Erik B 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Please call your local shelter or SPCA and report the incident. Surely they can check out the incident without mentioning your name. It is important to protect the animal. If you are posting information, you better be able to prove your accusations. If the person can be recognized from what you say, you have implied their name.
If you're worried about slander, at least step up and do the right thing. What good does posting do about what this person is doing? Do something positive and present what you have seen to the proper authorities. If not, shut up.
2007-01-20 23:40:21 · answer #4 · answered by towanda 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not slander, Liable per se because it's written.... last longer and reaches more people...
No names... means nothing sometimes, if you described the person, to an extent that others would know who you are talking about then you can be in some trouble. The one thing that could go in your favor is if the person did what you said.. therefore being a true statement.
2007-01-20 22:24:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
it is slander only if it is not true...can you prove it? also, if you call your local law enforcement agency they will tell you what agency has jurisdiction in the matter and you can report the incident as you "suspect" that cruelty has taken place and let them investigate to determine facts.
2007-01-28 16:17:24 · answer #6 · answered by landlubber 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Slander is defined as a spoken statement, made with the knowledge that it was false to a third person who understood it.
If those criteria exist here, the charge could be made.
2007-01-20 18:02:51 · answer #7 · answered by Jeffrey V 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It certainly could be. However, there are a few more things needed to be slander. For one, the "someone" has to actually be damaged by it. The post above incorrectly identifies "libel" as only printed material. In order to be libel it must also be proven false. Slander can be a truthful statement.
2007-01-20 17:55:34 · answer #8 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It is slander if you name the person you are refferring to. If you don't name specifics you can not be accused of slander. the person you are talking about may know it is her or him but if the info of thier personal info is not involved its not slander.
2007-01-26 16:16:50 · answer #9 · answered by goldmoon_dragon 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No it is not. Since you mentioned no names, dates or times.
You could have been talking about anyone or no one.
Does sound like you have a friend that feels awfully guilty though.
2007-01-20 18:05:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋