This week Law Street broke the story of the FBI’s latest violent crime data — if you haven’t checked it out yet you definitely should. This week, though, I want to talk about crimes of defamation, because though they are rarely discussed, they have similar ability to do serious harm to a person’s life. These are caused by careless, negligent, and often malicious words of one person against another. Some of these people are just talking to hear their own voices, and some are liars — there is a special place in hell for liars.

Crimes of defamation are rarely talked about on a large scale because, really, how do you quantify them?  Where do we draw the line between “Freedom of speech” and “defamatory content?” The area between the two is gray, but the laws exist to determine what is casual conversation and what is illegal.

The Supreme Court defines defamation as a four-element offense, which requires:

1. A false statement purporting to be fact concerning another person or entity;
2. Publication or communication of that statement to a third person;
3. Fault on the part of the person making the statement amounting to intent or at least negligence;  and,
4. Some harm caused to the person or entity who is the subject of the statement. 
   

Some states, like New York, take these federal guidelines a step further and determine various rules for defamation depending on the person being defamed. The first category is for “private” people — a group into which most of us fall. Private people are more broadly protected. If you negligently say something that is defamatory against me, and the above four elements are met, you’ve broken the law. It’s that simple!

New York also has two other classes: public official and public figure. President Barack Obama is a public official; Kim Kardashian is a public figure. (Get the difference?) These people have taken steps to thrust themselves into the public consciousness, and with widespread notoriety comes widespread ridicule and judgment. I believe the legal term is “Mo Money, Mo Problems.”

When dealing with Kim Kardashian, President Obama, or any other public person, New York mandates that a fifth requirement must be met: the defamatory speech must be malicious. Malice requires a specific intent to cause harm to a person — it’s a tougher hurdle to jump, but the rewards are much greater. When a U.K. newspaper claimed that Liberace was gay in the late 50s, he sued it for defamation and libel and was awarded a large amount of money. Tom Cruise won a similar suit, and let’s not forget when Lindsay Lohan tried to sue E-Trade for their drunk baby named “Lindsay.”

Liar, Liar Pants on Fire

The law says that truth is an affirmative defense to any claim of defamation. That is, if the defamatory statement is based on a true story, the speech is within the bounds of the law. This makes sense, right?  If you are a known thief, and someone tells their best friend that you steal, that is totally okay.

What’s not okay is when the defamation occurs and is based on untrue information. The law recognizes that the power of words and one’s reputation can carry a person very far, and does its best to protect an otherwise innocent person from being victimized by lies and rumors.

The point of these defamation laws is to combat that victimization. Because of these laws, an unfairly accused or viciously maligned person can stand firm in her innocence or his correct assertion. An easy way to do this is to have an adjudicatory decision in your favor, i.e. you’ve gone to court and won. In other words, proof is of paramount importance when attempting to bolster one’s argument in a defamation case.

“Show Me the Receipts!”

There are various ways to determine if something is true or false, and one of the easiest ways to make that determination is to review the record. Courts and triers of fact rely on hundreds of thousands, likely even millions, of pages of documents annually in order to parse out the truth from all of malarky. That is why law schools across the country focus on organization, meticulous record keeping, and the importance of creating a paper trail. It’s why we create elaborate filing systems, why every document is backed up, and why everything is committed to writing. The quickest way to piss off a lawyer is to make an assertion without substantiating evidence.

50 Cent, the Poet Laureate of the early 2000s, put it best when he said, “I talk a lot of shit, but I can back it up.”

The moral of the story is that crime is a problem, but we need to broaden the discussion. All criminal activity is reprehensible, and when the law is broken there need to be consequences. The law exists so that criminals don’t do whatever they want to do, and the same preclusions apply with words.

And if all else fails, don’t lie.

—

Peter Davidson is a recent graduate of law school who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Tweet him @PeterDavidsonII.

Featured image courtesy of [Angie Linder/Christina via Flickr]

The blog that feeds my insatiable hunger for “RHONJ” .gifs: RealityTVgifs

Peter Davidson II

Peter Davidson is a recent law school graduate who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Contact Peter at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Liar, Liar Pants on Fire appeared first on Law Street.

Violent crime across the United States continues its downward trend, according to data released today by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Nationally, violent crime in the first six months of 2013 decreased by 5.4 percent. But the results were decidedly mixed for Law Street’s Top 10 Most Dangerous Cities Over 200,000, with only half of those cities showing a decrease in crime.

A notable highlight of today’s FBI data came in St. Louis, Law Street’s number three Most Dangerous City over 200,000, where violent crime declined more than 20 percent. The decrease was all the more notable because a change in how rape is reported  resulted in a large increase for St. Louis in that category. More broadly, the reporting of rape increased in many cities due to the FBI’s new, expanded definition of forcible rape. Stockton, Calif., Law Street’s number five Most Dangerous City over 200,000, also was a standout, with violent crime in the city declining by nearly 21 percent.

The FBI’s semiannual report covers January to June 2013 — the most recent period for which comprehensive crime statistics are available. Law Street’s analysis of this preliminary data for each of the Top 10 Most Dangerous Cities Over 200,000 appears below as an update to our original rankings published last Fall. Changes in these preliminary statistics, included below, compared with the same time period in the previous year provide key information on emerging trends in these important cities ahead of the full-year coverage of rankings that will be available this Fall. Click here for developing Crime in America 2014 coverage.

1. Detroit, Mich.

PRELIMINARY 2013 UPDATE
The city of Detroit experienced an overall decrease in violent crime of 4.5 percent in for the first six months of 2013 compared to the first six months of 2012. Although Motor City saw a slight increase in robbery, aggravated assault and murder both declined by 12.22 percent and 8.48 percent, respectively. It is important to note that while the city technically reported an increase of 46.48 percent in rape, it is one of the many localities using the new, expanded FBI definition of forcible rape, and therefore the year-over-year data is not comparable.

PRELIMINARY 2013 VIOLENT CRIME TRENDS
Data below reflects changes for period January to June 2013 versus same period in 2012.
Total Violent Crime: -4.50%
Murder: -8.48%
Rape: +46.48%*
Robbery: +8.07%
Aggravated Assault: -12.22%

CLICK HERE FOR FULL COVERAGE OF DETROIT’S 2012 RANKING

2. Oakland, Calif.

PRELIMINARY 2013 UPDATE
Oakland experienced a ten percent increase in overall violent crime during the first six months of 2013 over the same period in 2012. Although murder, rape, and aggravated assault all dropped measurably, the city had 592 more instances of robbery during this period — an increase of 30.37 percent. Important to note, however, is that Oakland’s reported rapes dropped by approximately one third in the first six months of 2013.

PRELIMINARY 2013 VIOLENT CRIME TRENDS
Data below reflects changes for period January to June 2013 versus same period in 2012.
Total Violent Crime: +10.86%
Murder: -15.09%
Rape: -34.07%
Robbery: +30.37%
Aggravated Assault: -8.69%

CLICK HERE FOR FULL COVERAGE OF OAKLAND’S 2012 RANKING

3. St. Louis, Mo.

PRELIMINARY 2013 UPDATE
St. Louis provides an interesting case study for the first six months of 2013. Despite a sixty percent increase in reported rapes over the same period in 2012 (associated with the FBI’s expanded definition of forcible rape), violent crime in the city decreased by more than 20 percent. This significant change is due in large part to St. Louis’ major declines in murder, robbery, and aggravated assault.

PRELIMINARY 2013 VIOLENT CRIME TRENDS
Data below reflects changes for period January to June 2013 versus same period in 2012.
Total Violent Crime: -20.11%
Murder: -15.52%
Rape: +60.40%*
Robbery: -22.46%
Aggravated Assault: -23.29%

CLICK HERE FOR FULL COVERAGE OF ST. LOUIS’ 2012 RANKING

4.  Memphis, Tenn.

PRELIMINARY 2013 UPDATE
Overall, violent crime in Memphis remains generally constant, with a modest decline of 4.38 percent during the period of January to June 2013. The city’s reports of robbery, aggravated assault, and rape (the figure for which is not comparable to 2012 figures due to the FBI’s new, expanded definition of forcible rape) all decreased by five percent or less; however, murder in Memphis increased by 7.14 percent.

PRELIMINARY 2013 VIOLENT CRIME TRENDS
Data below reflects changes for period January to June 2013 versus same period in 2012.
Total Violent Crime: -4.38%
Murder: +7.14%
Rape: -5.14%*
Robbery: -3.95%
Aggravated Assault: -4.68%

CLICK HERE FOR FULL COVERAGE OF MEMPHIS’ 2012 RANKING

5. Stockton, Calif.

PRELIMINARY 2013 UPDATE
Unlike Oakland, the city of Stockton, Calif. experienced a 20.99 percent decrease in overall violent crime during the first six months of 2013. Each relevant violent crime category reported a significant drop, most notably a 63.64 percent decrease in murder (from 33 during this period in 2012 to 12 in 2013), and a 28.23 percent decline in robbery.

PRELIMINARY 2013 VIOLENT CRIME TRENDS
Data below reflects changes for period January to June 2013 versus same period in 2012.
Total Violent Crime: -20.99%
Murder: -63.64%
Rape: -12.50%
Robbery: -28.23%
Aggravated Assault: -16.62%

CLICK HERE FOR FULL COVERAGE OF STOCKTON’S 2012 RANKING

6. Birmingham, Ala.

PRELIMINARY 2013 UPDATE
According to the FBI, the city of Birmingham did not report preliminary 6-month figures in 2012; therefore we cannot indicate trends for this time period.

PRELIMINARY 2013 VIOLENT CRIME REPORTS
Data below reflects reports for period January to June 2013.
Total Number of Violent Crimes: 1,468
Total Number of Murders: 39
Total Number of Rapes: 79
Total Number of Robberies: 455
Total Number of Aggravated Assaults: 895

CLICK HERE FOR FULL COVERAGE OF BIRMINGHAM’S 2012 RANKING

7.  Baltimore, Md.

PRELIMINARY 2013 UPDATE
Baltimore’s violent crime rate remained fairly constant from January to June 2013 versus prior year, with a slight increase of 1.62 percent. With the addition of ten murders and 147 robberies for this time period, Charm City is slightly ahead of its prior year violent crime rate with 692.12 violent crimes per 100,000 people.

PRELIMINARY 2013 VIOLENT CRIME TRENDS
Data below reflects changes for period January to June 2013 versus same period in 2012.
Total Violent Crime: +1.62%
Murder: +9.52%
Rape: -2.61%
Robbery: +9.06%
Aggravated Assault: -3.53%

CLICK HERE FOR FULL COVERAGE OF BALTIMORE’S 2012 RANKING

8. Cleveland, Ohio

PRELIMINARY 2013 UPDATE
Violent Crime is up in Cleveland for the first six months of 2013 versus the same time period in 2012. The reporting of rape is up 17.34 percent in accordance with the FBI’s new, expanded definition of forcible rape, as is robbery; however, murder and aggravated assault in the city was down significantly, with decreases of 27.78 percent and 23 percent, respectively.

PRELIMINARY 2013 VIOLENT CRIME TRENDS
Data below reflects changes for period January to June 2013 versus same period in 2012.
Total Violent Crime: +7.49%
Murder: -27.78%
Rape: +17.34%*
Robbery: +11.79%
Aggravated Assault: -23.00%

CLICK HERE FOR FULL COVERAGE OF CLEVELAND’S 2012 RANKING

9. Atlanta, Ga.

PRELIMINARY 2013 UPDATE
Atlanta carries its continuing decrease in violent rime into 2013 with a drop of 9.75 percent from January to June. The city experienced declines in three out of four violent crime categories, most notably a 21.27 percent drop in aggravated assaults (which made up nearly 60 percent of its overall violent crime in the entire year of 2012).

PRELIMINARY 2013 VIOLENT CRIME TRENDS
Data below reflects changes for period January to June 2013 versus same period in 2012.
Total Violent Crime: -9.75%
Murder: -5.26%
Rape: -13.33%
Robbery: +11.23%
Aggravated Assault: -21.27%

CLICK HERE FOR FULL COVERAGE OF ATLANTA’S 2012 RANKING

10) Milwaukee, Wis.

PRELIMINARY 2013 UPDATE
Violent crime in Milwaukee increased slightly year over year during the period January to June 2013. A major point to note is that the FBI’s new, expanded definition of forcible rape significantly impacted the city’s rape statistics, as the category increased by over one hundred percent for this period. Robbery in the city increased by more than 16 percent; however, murder and aggravated assault both dropped.

PRELIMINARY 2013 VIOLENT CRIME TRENDS
Data below reflects changes for period January to June 2013 versus same period in 2012.
Total Violent Crime: +5.27%
Murder: -8.11%
Rape: +101.90%*
Robbery: +16.37%
Aggravated Assault: -5.41%

CLICK HERE FOR FULL COVERAGE OF MILWAUKEE’S 2012 RANKING

Research and analysis by Law Street’s Crime in America Team: Chelsey Goff, Ashley Powell, and Kevin Rizzo.

Sources:

Violent crime, population, murder, and officer statistics are from the FBI Preliminary Semiannual Uniform Crime Report, January – June 2013.

Click here to read more Crime in America coverage.

*The figure shown for the 2013 rape offense was reported using the new definition of rape and is not comparable to previous years’ historical forcible rape data.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post New FBI Data Shows Crime Dropping; Some Top 10 Dangerous Defy Trend appeared first on Law Street.

It’s been a busy few weeks here at Law Street Media as we launched our crime rankings last week and are continuing our efforts to provide content that is both useful and interesting. I now have the opportunity to casually peruse the section like any other reader, and I’ve been checking it out a lot recently.

Law Street’s Crime in America presents statistics gathered from around the country, including the safest places to live, using data gathered by the FBI.

Reading up on all of this crime has forced me to think about its prevalence, the unnecessary danger of certain areas, and what it says about our society. In recent years, there has been much coverage of the huge disparity in prosperity between segments of the population, with the Occupy Wall Street movement providing a notorious example. When I say “forced me to think about,” I mean I’m reflecting on the overabundance of first world problems I have, and how little they matter in a world full of very real conflicts.

I could complain for hours about how tough it is to be six months out of law school, but I have it easy compared to many: I have a job(s) and live in a major city with tons of personal and professional opportunities. There are many people who are still searching for work, and under much more dire circumstances.

In addition, reading Crime in America serves as a reminder that there are people who are under such hardship that they view crime as the only way out of their current situations.  Every time I complained to someone about law school, I often got “there are thousands of people who would kill to be able to go to law school” in response. After an exaggerated eye roll, I would steadfastly refuse to believe this statement was fact. Then I read Crime in America, which begs the question: “Why else are people committing violent crimes?” If you read about America’s ten most dangerous cities, then you’ll see that people are facing severe unemployment and increasing poverty. There is a strong correlation between financial uncertainty and criminal activity.

When I say severe unemployment, I’m not talking about being unable to find a job in a struggling legal economy.  These people can’t get jobs in any economy, for a variety of reasons.  All of the possible reasons lead them to believe that all hope is lost, and hopelessness can lead to criminal levels of desperation.

Many people think being a lawyer is the key to some degree of success, and to an extent they are correct. That success isn’t necessarily in the juris doctorate degree, but in the education that the degree represents. You learn unparalleled skills of analysis, critical thinking, writing, interpretation, oral advocacy, and time management.  You spend three years having your brain broken down and reassembled like some modern-day Frankenstein. It’s a daunting experience, but you emerge ready to face the world with conversational legalese and a leather briefcase.

There are literally thousands of people who cannot even imagine what it’s like to earn a bachelor’s degree, let alone a J.D.  There are people who, in America in 2013, do not even have the option of finishing high school.  These people are neither lazy nor stupid.  Instead, they haven’t been given the tools necessary for educational advancement. I would go so far as to guess that they have never been presented with the idea of academic success as a realistic option. It’s hard to want more from life if you have never experienced what “more” could be.

Law Street’s Crime in America puts problems into perspective, and beyond that it’s just interesting. So go read it! I’ll still complain about law school, but, you know…less.

Featured image courtesy of [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Department of Homeland Security) via Wikipedia]

—

Peter Davidson is a recent graduate of law school who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy.

Peter Davidson II

Peter Davidson is a recent law school graduate who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Contact Peter at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Crime Blog Really Makes You Think appeared first on Law Street.

Here at Law Street, we’ll be donating a lot of time to the bad guys in the next few days (foreshadowing!).  Today I am going to buck that trend, and extol the virtues of the modern day superheroes: prosecutors.

I’m embarrassed to say that I’m one of the kids who used to watch Law & Order and Perry Mason and think “one day I want to be a lawyer.”  They did all of the quintessential lawyer-like stuff, or so I thought.  I then went to law school and learned that most lawyers never get to do the awesome stuff that I saw on TV.

Cut to summer 2011, and I’m in New York at the first day of my internship with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.  I’ve mentioned this before, but I took the job on a whim.  I had no idea what being a prosecutor entailed, but the AUSAs I worked for gave me a baptism by fire.  This baptism was among the best experiences of my three years in law school.

I worked with two of the smartest people that I have ever had the pleasure of meeting.  One AUSA graduated from law school and worked at a top law firm for four years.  He then decided he wanted to become a prosecutor, so took the (often necessary) first step of clerking for a federal judge.  Immediately after starting the clerkship, he began the arduous task of applying to be a U.S. Attorney.  The timing worked out perfectly, and by the time his clerkship ended he was sworn in as an AUSA.  The second AUSA that I assisted had the highest GPA on record at her law school, clerked for a 4^th Circuit Judge and then Justice Scalia (SCALIA!!!!).  The pressure was definitely high; I knew that if I could impress them, then maybe the whole “legal career” was not just wishful thinking.

On my first day, I met AUSAs and was given three memos due by the end of the week.  This task was daunting considering that first year law students have four months to create their first legal memo. The difference with these memos was that they were being used in real trials of real people who faced real loss of their liberty.  That kind of pressure lit a fire under me that a legal writing grade never could, and it was the best type of game time challenge.

The second day, I was the second chair at a hearing in an illegal reentry case in front of a Southern District of New York judge. Big stuff! It was also my first encounter with a heinous example of legal unprofessionalism; a legal aid attorney was in no mood to be cordial or cooperative, and was not going to let a little thing like the law get in the way of representing her (guilty) client.  What did I learn?  The best way to shut opposing counsel down is not by being rude or snarky; it is stopping every argument they make with correct law, strong analysis, and a smile.

I experienced much in those three months working with the USAO-SDNY, and I maintain that it was the coolest job I had while in law school.

It became evident to me that summer why prosecutors are the most likely candidates for judicial appointments.  They gain real experience in the practice of law, in terms of persuasive writing, oral arguments, and jury trials.  They have insane workloads, and still find time to give each case the attention it deserves.

During my second year of law school, Justice Sonia Sotomayor came to my school for a dialogue with the students.  One of the questions presented to her was what she thought of the Supreme Court’s composition of former prosecutors and how that background affects their rulings.

Part of her answer focused on an inherent desire to stop the bad guys, and how that desire colors their interpretation of the law.  With that statement, she solidified what I always knew: prosecutors are wearing capes today, and are a huge cog in the wheel that protects us from criminals.

I work in homeland security now, and we often have to deal directly with prosecutors, judges, and law enforcement to further our goals of public safety.  The scenarios that I have been privy to range from the mundane to the insane, and the federal and local prosecutors are in the thick of the madness.

So as you consider your career trajectory, or why you’re considering law school, think about the lawyers you see on TV and know that it’s a real option for you.  Also, check out our crime blog, with it’s analysis of FBI statistics and crime data.  When you find yourself being terrified by the danger levels of certain cities, just make sure you locate the District Attorney and U.S. Attorney’s offices and send them a fruit basket or something, because they’ve got your back.

Images: [Wikimedia] [Wikimedia] [Wikimedia]

—

Peter Davidson is a recent graduate of law school who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy.

Featured image courtesy of [megadem via Flickr]

Peter Davidson II

Peter Davidson is a recent law school graduate who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Contact Peter at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Prosecutors as Modern Superheroes appeared first on Law Street.