Defamation of character. Beyond reasonable doubt, nothing cirumstatintial. What is the best way to prosecute?

Question

When dealing with defamation of character, most times its just hearsay and nothing solid. But in the case where you definitly have solid, valid proof, .... where the result of that defamation is lost jobs and harassment, and so on and so forth..... what is the best possibe angle in court to take in order to prosecute/ or legally handle the person that is responsible?

I understand that in a case like this, most of it is "he said/she said" and most often times circumstantial, and doesnt stand up in court. But if the evidences consist of phone records (that connect the "slanderer" with the jobs lost, and personal testimonies of a few people that were on the tail end of the "slander" as in they were the ones contacted...... how does this fair in court?

This is concerning US LAW

OK. to further that, if you connect records between persons A and B, (the one slandering, (A)and the one on the receiving end (B) about C (the one slandered) and Individual B is willing at first to testify or has atleast made specified statements that they have knowledge concerning the issue... if person B retracts their statement so that they dont look bad, and person A denies it, ...but you can manage to proove the contradicted statements made by persons A & B concerning the slander/defamation.... i.e., "they told me they terminiated C because of reason 1" but then they retract that statement to say "i never heard of any such thing" .... can you 'persuade' person B to testify, based on the retracted statements, using their duplicity against them, or, is that considering entrapment?

*sighs* sad part is, some of the parties involved are under the impression that a real 'going to court case' is like an episode of "Law and Order." *sighs, shakes head* where it is, in and out and prosecuted/defended and over in less then an hour. *sighs* *gooood loooorrrdddrd* when will they learn?

Answer 1

Sounds like you may have a case. It's impossible to judge the likelihood of success without knowing how the credibility of the respective witnesses will come across. Hire a lawyer to evaluate your claim. Since it is personal injury, you can probably get an attorney to take it on a contingent fee basis.

Answer 2

You would start with an attorney.

If you want to press criminal charges, call the local prosecutor.

If you want to sue, find an attorney that handles torts.

In the civil case, the problem isn't going to be proving what was said. The problem is usually connecting that to some damage. If you can get one single witness that says "Defendant told me X, and based on that statement alone, I fired Plaintiff" and you can further prove X is untrue, you win. However, you're probably going to get a witness that realizes that saying that makes them guilty of wrongful termination for not verifying X to begin with, so they say "Defendant told me X, and because of that, I took a close look at Plaintiff, and noticed that there were other behaviors I didn't like, so I fired him for that." and the damage wasn't because of the slander.

Anyway. A lawyer is the next step.

Answer 3

As its a civil matter it only has to be proved on the balance of probabilities, a lot easier to prove than beyond reasonable doubt. So phone records, witness statements should be fine. Instruct a lawyer with the full case details and they'll know how to procede. This assumes UK law.

Also context unimportant, if your named and the resultant fallout caused you obvious and quantifiable damage then you have an easy case. It can also be done if your not named but the likelihood to you is close enough to be seen as you by others, and if that was intentional although a lot harder.

OK US law, don't know at all then, good luck anyway

Answer 4

I'm not a lawyer, but that sounds like a solid case. As long as your witnesses are sound, then you should have no problems. The defendant's lawyer will try to claim that the phone calls regarded another matter and they will try to discredit your witnesses. The witness testimony will be stronger if they seem more like a 'neutral' party in the whole affair. If they're relatives or friends of yours, then you may have some problems.

Answer 5

You have to establish a clear connection between what was said or printed to the resulting actions that have befallen you due to what was said or printed. Witnesses are vital and helpful and the context in which it was perported also plays some role. For instance, on a public website that asks for opinions and free flow of thoughts like YA you would not have a case==unless the offender took it further on a personal basis. But then again, if you choose to recieve email then you are again asking for opinions and free flow of thought.---unless the wording becomes threatening to harm your body or property.

Answer 6

Are you unquestionably asserting that if the bible must be utilized in a court docket of regulation, you might have self assurance?! Are you unquestionably asserting that the try of no be counted if some thing is authentic or not is the way it stands up in a court docket of regulation?! you may not somewhat have self assurance that in spite of is "shown" in a court docket of regulation is, rather, authentic? you have on no account heard of the to blame getting off or the harmless being stumbled directly to blame? C'mon! i presumed you atheists have been meant to be smarter than that! a number of those questions are very disappointing in that regard. Now, in answer to the question, no, of path not! So what? I, as a Catholic, am keen to resign believing as quickly as you atheists tutor devoid of any question that God would not exist because of the fact which you may not do this anymore than i will tutor previous a shadow of a doubt that he does.

Answer 7

Solid evidence showing real financial ($$$) harm holds up very well or should - it depends upon the competence of the lawyer and honesty of the judge and other parties.

Answer 8

*go to the police with you evidence or you could do so via a solicitor .good luck.

Answer 9

A GOOD LAWYER IS YOUR MAN I TAKE IT YOUR HERE IN UK

Answer 10

Is this US or UK law please?

Thanks