This short piece has been taken from “The Duty not to Continue Distributing your Own Libels” article. It might prove useful to others, even if they aren’t interested. However, the articles can be used together. This section can be thought of as either a subroutine or, if preferred, a lemma. This was also published in the Notre Dame Law Revision, volume 97, pp. 351-55. Abstract:
Does it constitute libel to state that someone was convicted, and then not mention the fact that that conviction was overturned? It is also libelous to say that someone was convicted, but not mention the acquittal. It turns out that the answer is often yes. The precedents in this Article prove it.
This is also where I want to get your thoughts and see how you find the information useful.
The post "Libel by Omission of Exculpatory Legal Decisions" appeared first on Reason.com.