About time! Stolen Honor scumbag sued for libel.

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2004-10-18 02:12pm

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u ... rry_film_3

By DAVID B. CARUSO, Associated Press Writer

PHILADELPHIA - A Vietnam veteran shown in a documentary criticizing Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites)'s anti-war activities filed a libel lawsuit against the movie's producer Monday, saying the film falsely calls the veteran a fraud and a liar.

Kenneth J. Campbell, now a professor at the University of Delaware, said in the suit that "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal" combines footage of him appearing at a 1971 war protest with narration that claims that many of the supposed veterans who took part in the event were later "discovered as frauds" who "never set foot on the battlefield, or left the comfort of the States, or even served in uniform."

The suit said viewers would be left with the perception that Campbell had lied about his military service.

Campbell attached copies of his military records to the lawsuit, showing that he received a Purple Heart and eight other medals, ribbons and decorations for his service in Vietnam.

Film producer Carlton Sherwood's company, Red White and Blue Productions, did not immediately return a call on Monday seeking comment.

Campbell also threatened legal action against the Sinclair Broadcast Group, an owner of 62 television stations that has announced that it intends to pre-empt regular programming to broadcast "Stolen Honor."

The film explores Kerry's 1971 testimony before the Senate and links him to anti-war activist and actress Jane Fonda (news). Vietnam prisoners of war claim in the film that his testimony demeaned them and led to prisoners being held longer.

The Democratic National Committee (news - web sites) filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (news - web sites) contending that airing the film should be considered an illegal in-kind contribution to the Bush campaign. Kerry's presidential campaign asked that each station carrying the program provide a similar amount of time to Kerry supporters.

Sinclair has contended that the program is news and has invited Kerry to appear on a post-broadcast program. Kerry has declined.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-10-18 02:35pm

Kenneth J. Campbell, now a professor at the University of Delaware, said in the suit that "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal" combines footage of him appearing at a 1971 war protest with narration that claims that many of the supposed veterans who took part in the event were later "discovered as frauds" who "never set foot on the battlefield, or left the comfort of the States, or even served in uniform."

They didn't mention him by name, so that's out.

How tight was the camera on him during the protest footage?

If he was included in a pan of a rally, even if the camera paused briefly on him, then he has no case at all.

If it was exclusively focused on him the entire time the narrator speaks, then he might have a stronger case. I say *might* because US libel laws are pretty loose and its a bitch to prove in court.

All in all, it sounds like a stunt Michael Moore would pull in the editing room.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-10-18 02:39pm

Notice how it's impossible to say anything about any right-wing bullshit without a right-wing apologist immediately screaming "MICHAEL MOORE!"

This time it took only one post. Good rapid-response, guys

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-10-18 02:45pm

On a semi-related note, it's an article written by Horatio Caine (David Caruso) of CSI: Miami fame.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-10-18 03:24pm

Darth Wong wrote:Notice how it's impossible to say anything about any right-wing bullshit without a right-wing apologist immediately screaming "MICHAEL MOORE!"

This time it took only one post. Good rapid-response, guys

Excuse the fuck out of me.
Am I apologizing for the alleged libel or defending it if it did occur? Not hardly.
I *am* pointing out that legally, libel is damned hard to prove in a US court (you know, that pesky first amendment that a lot of people on the left and the right would deny to others) and his odds of winning this case are very slim unless the editor of the film freeze framed it on him and gave the voice over.

And as far as Moore goes, that's the exact kind of trick he pulls in the editing room. Like I've said before, he pushes it right to the edge, but doesn't cross the line, of libel with a lot of the stunts he pulls.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-10-18 03:27pm

Are you capable of discussing politics in any capacity WITHOUT referring to Michael Moorein every post? I'm just curious.

Utah Jak · Post by **Utah Jak** » 2004-10-18 03:30pm

I still don't understand why every time I come to the forum (which last time I checked was on a sci-fi site) most posters are in the political forum. If I wanted to talk politics I would go back to http://www.conservativeunderground.com. I came here to talk Star Wars and Star Trek.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-10-18 03:31pm

When was the last time I brought up Moore other than today?

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-10-18 03:32pm

Utah Jak wrote:I still don't understand why every time I come to the forum (which last time I checked was on a sci-fi site) most posters are in the political forum. If I wanted to talk politics I would go back to http://www.conservativeunderground.com. I came here to talk Star Wars and Star Trek.

Then stay in the SWvST forum. Or the PSW, PST, or OSF forums. It's that simple.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-10-18 03:37pm

Glocksman wrote:When was the last time I brought up Moore other than today?

Other than in a thread about Moore, of course.

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2004-10-18 03:44pm

Libel applies to cases of actual malice and/ or reckless disregard for the truth. If the photo clearly shows Campbell while the announcer calls the anti-war veterans frauds, it's open and shut. Campbell is not a public figure, so if he wants to press the issue he'll win as long as his bank account holds up. Or he could try his luck in a British court, since British libel laws are more sensible.

I hope the men who served with Kerry slap the Shit Boaters with libel suits. John Dean thinks it's a slam-dunk, since like Campbell, they're not public figures like Kerry.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-10-18 03:48pm

Utah Jak wrote:I still don't understand why every time I come to the forum (which last time I checked was on a sci-fi site) most posters are in the political forum. If I wanted to talk politics I would go back to http://www.conservativeunderground.com. I came here to talk Star Wars and Star Trek.

Then stay the fuck out of N&P, dick-smack.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-10-18 03:52pm

Elfdart wrote:Libel applies to cases of actual malice and/ or reckless disregard for the truth. If the photo clearly shows Campbell while the announcer calls the anti-war veterans frauds, it's open and shut. Campbell is not a public figure, so if he wants to press the issue he'll win as long as his bank account holds up. Or he could try his luck in a British court, since British libel laws are more sensible.

I hope the men who served with Kerry slap the Shit Boaters with libel suits. John Dean thinks it's a slam-dunk, since like Campbell, they're not public figures like Kerry.

But if he was at a public protest, than he was a public figure at the time the film was shot. Where did the footage come from? News archives? He can't claim an expectation of privacy while attending a public rally.

Like I said, the libel would occur only the the camera was fixated on him (or freeze framed by the filmmaker) with that narration going on. If it was just a crowd shot with brief pauses on individuals, then he really doesn't have a case under US libel laws.

And as far as British libel laws go, how the hell fould a US citizen sue another US citizen over actions occuring in the US in a British court?

Not to mention that British style libel laws serve to censor free expression. Just witness the McDonald's libel case. Micky D's wouldn't have even bothered to go to court with that bullshit case here in the US.

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2004-10-18 03:55pm

Oops! I just found the article and Dean thinks Kerry has an excellent case against the Shit Boaters, too. He points out that Barry Goldwater won a libel case against Fact magazine, which called him insane.

Proving that the charges are false and done with provable malice should be like shooting fish in a barrel.

http://writ.corporate.findlaw.com/dean/20040831.html

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-10-18 03:57pm

The thing is without seeing the footage in question, we're all guessing.
It could be clear libel and it could be clearly not libel.

Someone do a vidcap when Sinclair runs the film and post it here so we can see for ourselves.

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2004-10-18 04:09pm

Glocksman wrote:
Elfdart wrote:Libel applies to cases of actual malice and/ or reckless disregard for the truth. If the photo clearly shows Campbell while the announcer calls the anti-war veterans frauds, it's open and shut. Campbell is not a public figure, so if he wants to press the issue he'll win as long as his bank account holds up. Or he could try his luck in a British court, since British libel laws are more sensible.

I hope the men who served with Kerry slap the Shit Boaters with libel suits. John Dean thinks it's a slam-dunk, since like Campbell, they're not public figures like Kerry.
But if he was at a public protest, than he was a public figure at the time the film was shot. Where did the footage come from? News archives? He can't claim an expectation of privacy while attending a public rally.

Like I said, the libel would occur only the the camera was fixated on him (or freeze framed by the filmmaker) with that narration going on. If it was just a crowd shot with brief pauses on individuals, then he really doesn't have a case under US libel laws.

And as far as British libel laws go, how the hell fould a US citizen sue another US citizen over actions occuring in the US in a British court?

Not to mention that British style libel laws serve to censor free expression. Just witness the McDonald's libel case. Micky D's wouldn't have even bothered to go to court with that bullshit case here in the US.

Ask Time magazine. They had to cough up over a million dollars and a public apology after Newsweek reporter Dusko Doder kicked their asses in a London court. They accused him of being a Russian spy after he scooped them.

Besides, SLAPPs are fairly common under fucked up US libel law, too.

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-10-18 04:11pm

Darth Wong wrote:Notice how it's impossible to say anything about any right-wing bullshit without a right-wing apologist immediately screaming "MICHAEL MOORE!"

This time it took only one post. Good rapid-response, guys

Why wasn't the same outrage portrayed when Michael Whore's "documentary" came out? Ah... that's right, he portrays the views of the AABB crowd.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-10-18 04:28pm

Would you just go play tag in rush-hour traffic with your invisible friends and leave us the hell alone?

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-10-18 04:31pm

Like it or not Karrde's got a point (that whole broken clock thing). This sounds like a case of the slimy but not technically libelous that's been a hallmark of Moore's films for a long time. The outrage tends to be purely partisan and so it's hard to take it seriously now.

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2004-10-18 04:40pm

Talon Karrde wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Notice how it's impossible to say anything about any right-wing bullshit without a right-wing apologist immediately screaming "MICHAEL MOORE!"

This time it took only one post. Good rapid-response, guys
Why wasn't the same outrage portrayed when Michael Whore's "documentary" came out? Ah... that's right, he portrays the views of the AABB crowd.

Because libel requires (a) that something be demonstrably false and (b) that the statement was either known to be false or was done with "reckless disregard" and/ or malice.

Campbell fought in Vietnam, earning a PH. This "documentary" by Shit Boat wannabes calls him and the other antiwar vets frauds. The film doesn't differentiate between those who did serve and the alleged phonies. Since the purpose of this film is to smear the antiwar movement, you have malice from the Shit Boaters, most of whom are bad liars and too fucking stupid to conceal their animosity toward Kerry and the Winter Soldier witnesses.

Demostrably false claim about Campbell: Strike One!

At best no effort was made to back up the claims about Campbell and the other vets; at worst it was a deliberate lie: Strike Two!

Open malice from the Shit Boaters, Sherwood and Sinclair: Strike Three! They're out!