In what is shaping up to be a very interesting defamation case, a federal judge has ordered Rep. John Murtha to testify in a defamation lawsuit filed against him for commenting on an alleged Iraqi massacre. Murtha (D-Pa.) , a former Marine. accused Marines involved in the killings at Haditha of particiipating in “cold-blooded murder and war crimes.” Frank Wuterich, a Marine sergeant involved in the incident, has sued Murtha for libel and invasion of privacy over his comments. Usually a member of congress is absolutely privileged (or protected) under the speech and debate clause of the constitution. On the floor of the House, Murtha can say most anything about anyone — within the rules of the House. Outside of Congress, however, courts have historically been more reluctant to recognize an absolute privilege. That seems to be the thrust of the comments made by U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer: ‘You’re writing a very wide road for members of Congress to go to their home districts and say anything they choose about private persons and be able to do so without any liability. Are you sure you want to do that?” Collyer said, adding later, ”How far can a congressman go and still be protected?” This could be an precedent setter in the making. Of course, truth is a defense in defamation even without the privilege. Moreover, courts are divided on so called group libel cases. Either way, it is going to be interesting.
For the full story, click here