Reply #50: Drudge gets away with shit against *public figures* [View All]

[0rganism]

Currently, defamation of public figures is held as protected speech under the first ammendment, unless the public figure can prove that the allegation is false and was published maliciously -- ie, the author knew of the falsehood beforehand. That's why Sen. Kerry would have no case, he's a public figure.

However, Ms. Polier is NOT a public figure.

Drudge is liable under various state laws not to publish allegations that defame the reputations of private citizens. For instance, if Ms. Polier took up her case in Illinois, the relevant statute would be

(740 ILCS 145/1) (from Ch. 126, par. 1) 
    Sec. 1. That if any person shall falsely use, utter or publish
words, which in their common acceptance, shall amount to charge any 
person with having been guilty of fornication or adultery, such words 
so spoken shall be deemed actionable, and he shall be deemed guilty 
of slander. (Source: R.S. 1874, p. 992.)  

Not too high a standard, eh? And the burden of proof would be on Drudge to show that his allegations of adultery had merit.

It's even nastier in the UK. UK doesn't have a "free press" right, per se, so public figures can bring libel suits, even if an allegation has merit. If this is a false accusation, Ms. Polier is sitting on a goldmine.