Friday, June 1, 2018

See for Yourself: Defamation Per Se By Leslie Malm

For obvious reasons, I have zero interaction with Leslie Malm, and I refuse to be baited by her on public fora. That said, she certainly could stand with some legal advice as to the meaning of the phrase, “defamation per se.” Maybe Jeff Chiow would be so kind. Indeed, a discussion about punitive damages, and the fact that she is not covered by the church’s D&O policy, would not be untoward.

Below is a specific example from Fairfax Underground, in which she refers to me as a “stalker” in a conversation with a third party. Having not had any communication with Leslie since 2014, her comments are, at best, a reckless disregard for the truth, and thus legally actionable.

Nor can writing about someone on this on any other blog or publication constitute “stalking.” If that were the case, The Donald would successfully have sued CNN long ago. Think about it.

It’s called the First Amendment. I am guessing Leslie missed that part of school, along with the relevant second grade English classes.