I have made no bones about my disdain for Irvin Muchnick. Frankly, I don't care what happens to the guy. The hatred began when he tried to make a philosophical point by stopping a class action settlement that deprived money to thousands, including myself.
Legally, he had that right. Morally, he did not. In 2011, the Court of Appeals upheld his objection in a 2-1 decision. It was the definition of winning on a technicality. The only thing Muchnick accomplished was to make sure freelance writers never see a penny for damages caused by publishers and data bases.
Just when it seemed like there would be no justice for his cowardly act, Muchnick broke the cardinal rule of journalism and now could pay the price. Schadenfreude or no schadenfreude, a lot of people were happy when he was slapped with a defamation and invasion of privacy lawsuit.
Muchnick accused a minor of being a sexual assailant. That is an undisputed fact. He did not say alleged assailant, he said assailant. The minor and his parents have emphatically denied any wrong doing. No charges of any kind were filed. Muchnick went so far as to publish the minor's name and produce several documents on his website that were supposed to be protected under Maryland state law. As he awaits trial, Muchnick signed a consent decree to redact the minor's name and documents.
Like he did when objecting to the freelance settlement, Muchnick has been able to persuade an attorney to represent him pro bono. Of course, that will mean little if he loses the $1 million suit.
The legal system will decide if Muchnick's actions resulted in a tort against the minor. But in the name of real journalists everywhere, there will be a loud chorus of cheers if he is held responsible.
No comments:
Post a Comment