Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 08:35:28 -0400
From: Brad Page
Subject: Re: Jason Appletree v George Chatham
Each reflects a certain bias although my bias is to not respond positively to “how dare you” comments when a citizen raises reasonable questions. The actions of Mr. Fiacco are certainly up for question if the following is true: “But, remember what happened at the last meeting where, after the Tree Protection Element had been discussed and changes proposed to be incorporated and practically everyone left, Fiocco pushed forward a vote on the Tree Element anyway, around midnight.”
Libel laws don’t apply to conversations about politicians . Although George Chatham offers an opinion about the honesty of Mr. Fiacco’s actions in timing a vote after the hearing had been closed and the interested stakeholders had left the hearing room (my impression) I don’t find his comments malicious. Rather he reflects the concerns of us all, particularly in the current state and national context when the public discourse has so-debased trust in our representatives. Personally, I’m glad he brought the issue to my attention.
Perhaps Mr. Fiacco’s conduct and motivations might the first question brought up at the next meeting.
Brad Page
PS Just to broaden my knowledge on defamation law in North Carolina I went to the ultimate Oracle: The Internet.
In North Carolina two forms of slander and libel are recognized: private and public. In the case of Mr. Fiacco he is classified as public. If you’re up for it you might memorize the following:
– *Public Plaintiffs:* Think of your politicians, celebrities, and other
notable public figures. What do all these persons have in common? They’ve
voluntarily or involuntarily availed themselves to the forefront of public
criticism, debate, or comment, and are at the very heart of shaping the
fabric of society. Furthermore, they are figures who the public has a vital
interest in publicly discussing, without fear of legal repercussion. As
they’ve either voluntarily (or involuntarily) availed themselves to such a
lifestyle, public plaintiffs must prove a defendant acted with actual
malice or reckless disregard when communicating or publishing a defamatory
statement. North Carolina case law has held actual malice to be the
standard of fault for public individuals. Cline v. Brown, 24 N.C. App.
209 (1974)
<https://scholar.google.com.vn/scholar_case?case=14741534219454074674&q=cline+v+brown&hl=en&as_sdt=2006>
2019-06-14