Message from TX-RPOA -Martosko Cleared of Libel Claim

TX-RPOA E-News
>From RPOA Texas Outreach and
Responsible Pet Owners Alliance
Crossposting is encouraged.
July 5, 2013

Daily Mail’s Martosko Cleared of Libel Claim
By Betsy Rothstein on July 2, 2013

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/daily-mails-martosko-cleared-of-libel-claim_b109381
OR
http://tinyurl.com/mo5lrpk

In mid-March, Mother Jones jabbed then-Daily Caller’s Executive Editor
and current Daily Mail U.S. Political Editor David Martosko with news of
a libel lawsuit. Well, today the good folks over at MJ can read the
following ruling and weep as the case has been dismissed by a unanimous 5-0
ruling in New York.

As reported by Mother Jones, Martosko admitted to using a fake Facebook
profile to pose as a “dope-smoking commie” to gather info on animal rights
activists. The defamation suit involved Humane League of Philadelphia, Inc.
Vs. Martosko, Rick Berman, his former employer, the anti-progressive PR
shop, Berman & Company and the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF). The suit
centered on an ad he helped create for CCF
that was published in the NYT in 2008. [The ad in question “Was HSUS
Speaking To a Terrorist Group?” can be found at the url above] … claimed
that the Humane Society of the United States sent one of its vice presidents
to speak at a fundraiser for an animal rights group linked to federal
terrorism convictions. The suit claimed Berman and Company libeled that
group.

Ruling:
” . given defendants’ detailed and far more specific documentary evidence
and testimony, plaintiff’s claims are too vague and speculative to defeat
defendants’ motion [for dismissal].”

” . defendant David Martosko wrote the ad and stated his belief in the
veracity of the statements therein, and submitted documentation
corroborating his beliefs.”

” . the court and plaintiff cite no facts suggesting that defendants had
serious doubts about the truth of any of the statements, in 2008 or any
other year.”

… “Martosko’s good faith reliance on newspaper articles precludes a
finding of actual malice.”

“Some activists in the animal rights industry are more vicious, and more
litigious, than anyone else in Washington,” said Martosko in reaction to the
ruling. “But we knew we were right, and my research was solid. I wouldn’t be
where I am if I was into cutting corners.”

Advertisements

~ by topcatsroar on July 5, 2013.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: