Student ordered to pay $100,000 over Twitter and Facebook defamation of teacher
Student ordered to pay $100,000 over Twitter defamation
of teacher
Music teacher in Australia wins case against former
student who defamed her on Twitter and Facebook
By Jonathan Pearlman, Sydney9:07AM GMT 05 Mar 2014
A music teacher in Australia has been awarded £57,000
($AUS105,000) in damages for defamation on Twitter and Facebook after she was
targeted by a former student who "bore a grudge".
Andrew Farley, 20, the son of the school’s head of the
music and arts department, wrote defamatory messages about Christine Mickle,
58, who replaced Mr Farley’s father. He had never been taught by the popular
teacher but posted the messages a year after graduating, suggesting she was
responsible for the fate of his father, who stood down in 2008 for health
reasons.
"For some reason it seems that the defendant bears a
grudge against the plaintiff, apparently based on a belief that she had
something to do with his father leaving the school," said district court
judge Michael Elkaim.
"There is absolutely no evidence to substantiate
that belief."
The case comes ahead of a separate defamation action in
Australia brought by the Liberal party pollsters Mark Textor and Lynton Crosby,
who also work as Tory advisers. The duo are suing a former Labor MP, Mike
Kelly, over a tweet accusing them of introducing Australia to "push
polling", or using loaded questions to sway poll outcomes.
In Britain, Sally Bercow, wife of the Commons Speaker,
was last year forced to make a public apology and pay damages to Lord McAlpine
after the High Court found a tweet by her which falsely linked him to
allegations of child sexual abuse was defamatory. She was reportedly forced to
pay about £15,000, plus costs.
In the latest case in Australia, the court ruled that the
social media comments in late 2012 by Mr Farley, a former student at Orange
High School, had a "devastating effect" on the teacher, who took sick
leave before eventually returning to work on a limited basis.
"When defamatory publications are made on social
media it is common knowledge that they spread," the judge said.
"They are spread easily by the simple manipulation
of mobile phones and computers. Their evil lies in the grapevine effect that
stems from the use of this type of communication."
Mr Farley ignored a letter from Ms Mickle's lawyers in
November 2012 and only removed the comments and apologised
"unreservedly" after he received another letter the following month.
The court questioned the sincerity of Mr Farley’s
apology, noting he had tried to argue in his defence that the comments were
true.
"The defence of truth when it is spurious is
particularly hurtful to a person who has been the subject of such
unsubstantiated allegations," Judge Elkaim said.
Comments
Post a Comment