http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Libel_and_slander
The following paragraph is extracted from this link
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/NC%3A+state+employee+sues+for+libel+%26+slander%3A+governmental+immunity...-a0168333884
The public immunity doctrine protects public officials from individual liability for negligence in the performance of the governmental or discretionary duties. However, the public immunity doctrine does not protect public officials whose actions are determined to be malicious or corrupt conduct or beyond the scope of their official duties. In libel and slander cases brought against governmental employees and/or officials, the loss of governmental immunity can only result in situations in which a governmental official or employee acts out of malice toward the one who is allegedly the victim of libel or slander.
This is some pretty heinous verbiage. Can you imagine any other job (besides working for Uncle Sam) where you where totally immune to repercussions associated with negligence on your part that caused real and substantive harm to individuals and organizations?
Without getting into the specifics, some claims were leveled at me personally and at my Company by US Government Officials that, if they occurred in the commercial world, could have formed the basis for a liable and slander suite against the folks leveling the claims. BUT, since they are working for the Government, they may get away with just claiming that they were negligent so tough noogies. Well tough noogies unless I can prove that:
"a governmental official or employee acts out of malice toward the one who is allegedly the victim of libel or slander"I don't know if I will have the pleasure of pursuing this in court but I must say that I find it distasteful that by combining pure fabrication with materials quoted out of context Government Officials can hide behind
"negligence in the performance of the governmental or discretionary duties"as an excuse! The folks I am talking about are not stupid so I have to believe that the action constitutes
"a governmental official or employee acts out of malice toward the one who is allegedly the victim of libel or slander". There is another aspect of this that I also find highly amusing, numerous highly respected members of the legal community (including a former Assistant Attorney General) told me in person that it was pretty standard operating procedure for the Government to fabricate these kinds of things and that it was actually pretty funny in the context of the truth of the case moving forward and I shouldn't take it personally.
If it were the early 1800's I would challenge the individuals in question to a duel. I quickly realized after writing the last sentence that in order to accept it would require a certain amount of honor and courage so I guess that wouldn't work.
No comments:
Post a Comment