Is it a crime for the "target" or "subject" to slander a witness in public

[tridim]

in an ongoing grand jury case, even if that witness is a public figure? I ask because Rove's talking points certainly slander Joe Wilson's name via outright lies about what he's said in the past. I hope Fitzgerald can use the latest RW talking points as evidence.

[KellyPaDem]

1. It's very difficult...

If the person who is being slandered is a public person you can not slander them. You would have to commit malice. Which is that you knew the information you were spreading was a lie (which is very difficult to prove because it falls under, "I know what your thinking") and YOU spread it anyway (which is also very difficult to prove. Because you would have to prove Rove was the one behind the writing of talking points memo.) Also, as a public figure you have less of a right to privacy and you have to accept a certain level of "misinformation" being spread about you.

At least that's what I remember from my college class. Hope that helped.

[pgh_dem]

2. Bit easier to prove in this context I think...

Since if Rove's slanders contradict his own GJ testimony, then it is prima facie evidence of malice, in that it is a matter of public record that he knew the public statements were false.

Or....it would be prima facie evidence that he perjured himself under oath before the GJ...which would you rather defend against...?

[KellyPaDem]

6. I'm not sure but...

I think GJ testimony is not a matter of public record, I think it's sequestered information. But I'm not positive.

[CBGLuthier]

3. Slander is not a "crime" under any conditions

Slander can be actionable at a civil level but it is never a crime in this country.

[Jacobin]

5. Actually there are some state criminal statutes that punish

slander, but of course they are never used, at least not in modern times.

So, your statement is accurate in practice.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

4. No, but it is a crime to intimidate a witness

So watch for threats

[mandomom]

7. Was it intimidation of a witness, or perhaps

conspiracy to intimidate a witness? Does such a conspiracy require that the actor be directly implicated in the crime under investigation?