This may be a flakey idea, but can anyone....

[charlyvi]

the swiftboat wingnuts for lying about Kerry's killing a teen, self inflicted wounds, etc, for slander? I know it's a political ad, but are political ads exempted from the truth? Could someone force them, in a court of law, to back up these claim, or get an injunction on this ad until the case was heard? Just asking.

[FatSlob]

1. 1st, you would have to prove that they are lying.

Which is next to impossible.

[charlyvi]

2. Would the onus be on you to prove they are lying,

Or, would be the onus be on them to prove they are telling the truth?

[FatSlob]

3. The onus is upon the accuser.

Therefore, Senator Kerry would have to prove, with a preponderance of evidence, that the SWIFT guys are lying. It can't be done. He'd be laughed out of court.

[charlyvi]

4. Told you....

it might be a flakey idea. Thanks

[KansDem]

5. But wouldn't the SWIFT guys have to prove...

...that Kerry did all they say he did?

Aren't they the ones doing the accusing?

Of course, the last thing Kerry should do is get tangled up with this gang, but if they are accusing Kerry of all this malfeasance, then they should offer proof...

[FatSlob]

7. You'd think so, but you need to look at if legally.

Kerry would be the one making the legal accusation of wrongdoing (alleging libel/slander). He would have to prove his allegation, and the only way he could do that would be to prove that he DID NOT do what they say.

[KansDem]

10. Let me see if I understand this...

I can go on national news and say "George W Bush has sex with sheep," and he can come back at me and call me a liar and I can say "Prove it!" and the burden of proof would be on him?

Legally speaking...

[FatSlob]

12. Legally, yes, but I am not a lawyer.

Of course, you'd be hard pressed to find ANYBODY to put you on the air.

[TrustingDog]

14. something like Saddam had to prove he DID NOT have WMDS....

rather than BushTeam prove that HE DID.

lady justice got a migraine over that one I'm sure.

[FatSlob]

15. Thanks for the chuckle.

[beyurslf]

6. Not only does he have to prove they are lying, he would also

have to prove that they KNEW they were lying and did it with malicious intent. Isn't that right?

That's why you almost never see those people in court because it is almost impossible to prove.

[FatSlob]

8. Correct. Thanks for reminding me about the knowing part.

[rinsd]

11. Correct....

American Libel/Slander law is written in a away to protect malicious use of it to silence critics. Unfortunately, you have to deal with the crap that hides behind such oble sentiments.

[charlyvi]

9. Can an organization, like MoveOn.org, bring the suit?

I didn't mean it had to be Kerry. Couldn't they bring a suit against these people saying they are lying?

[rinsd]

13. No, they wouldn't be the affected party. (nt)

[TrustingDog]

16. but, isn't Kerry a representative of about half the people of the US....

there should be an exception to that rule in these cases, methinks.