RSS

Why A Law For The Dead?

27 May
Why A Law For The Dead?

 

An AdLLaw Petition signee commented:

“The fact that people take advantage of this loophole is disgusting.”

Why A Law For The Deceased2It is not so much a loophole as a conscious decision by lawmakers to avoid doing the right thing.   In order for it to be a legal loophole there would first have to be a law.  The absence of this law provides immoral profit for some, a perverse entertainment for many and pain for others.

Michael Jackson continues to be one of the hardest working persons in the entertainment business.  The US Courts and Government are in agreement he is enough of a person to continue to produce material; be a part of that material; go on tour; be sued; taxed; hire contractors and employees through representation.  But he is no longer a person when it comes to getting justice for slander against him.

Michael Jackson is not alone when it comes to this.  It happens to persons known the world over and those only known in their hometown.  All these people are equally important.

If a decedent can be sued for slander which may have happened while they were alive, have the case against them handled by family or estate managers then why does it not work in reverse?

The biggest argument against this proposed law is it will violate our First Amendment rights.

That is misleading.


Crime Is SlanderIf making a law which makes it illegal to slander the deceased violates US First Amendment Rights then there would be no slander laws, not even for the living.

Because the crime is slander.  Not who is or can be slandered.  

Support the Petition Initiative:

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/protect-the-legacy-of

Contact the lawmakers and tell them you support the proposed law and want them to do the same.

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/write-or-call#write

(We do not support cover ups or intimidating wronged people.  We ask that if the wronged is the deceased they are not ignored)

By: S. Kendrick, Resolution Specialist – a.k.a. Dial Dancer

 
5 Comments

Posted by on May 27, 2014 in AdLLaw Initiative, Advocacy

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

5 responses to “Why A Law For The Dead?

  1. Patricia Young

    May 27, 2014 at 5:47 pm

    This is a very interesting article…it definitely gives one pause to think about appropriate answers to your questions:

    (1) “The US Courts and Government are in agreement he [Michael Jackson] is enough of a person to continue to produce material; be a part of that material; go on tour; be sued; taxed; hire contractors and employees through representation. But he is no longer a person [after death] when it comes to getting justice for slander against him.”

    (2) “If a decedent can be sued for slander which may have happened while they were alive, have the case against them handled by family or estate managers then why does it not work in reverse?”

    Both of these questions pose a dilemma that our judicial system needs to rectify, sooner rather than later. We have all seen firsthand what happens when a deceased person’s family/estate loses the ability to protect their loved one from slander…money grubbers come crawling out of the woodwork like termites looking for food, i.e., $$$$$$$.

    My question is can a representative of the deceased person’s estate file a civil action against a person for the crime of slander? Wouldn’t this crime of slander be interfering with the estate’s ability to earn money on behalf of the beneficiaries?

     
  2. AdLLaw Initiative (@CADEFLAW)

    May 29, 2014 at 3:07 pm

    Thank you for posting Patricia Young. The U.S. Laws do not recognize a decedent as having a “Reputation” as they do a living person. Therefore, the family members will have no WIN in filing a civil action. For that reason we promote this Cadeflaw/AdLLaw Initiative. The Estate Managers acting on behalf of a decedent are only interested in the name as a business or a means of generating profits. They are not treated as human-beings with living relations, although they (the mangers) forget that they are “Employees” ONLY.

    If the estates of the decedents were not generating what they deem as proper income they may attempt to give it a good fight in court. However, the estate would likely be losing millions of dollars before the mangers attempted to protect the decedents name legally. Read these two blogs, they have good information on this. Hope I was able to answer satisfactorily.

    http://www.defamationlawblog.com/2009/12/is-speaking-ill-of-the-dead-considered-defamation/

    http://jonathanturley.org/2007/08/18/defaming-the-dead/

     
  3. Dialdancer

    May 30, 2014 at 3:37 am

    Patricia Young asked:

    “My question is can a representative of the deceased person’s estate file a civil action against a person for the crime of slander? Wouldn’t this crime of slander be interfering with the estate’s ability to earn money on behalf of the beneficiaries?”

    This is a very good question. I have part of an answer, but it may only be applicable to one or two States. I am going to speak with a legal expert. I will come back with an answer.

    I do know if the quilts my Grandmother made were considered marketable and thereby would generate revenue that would be her…… “Estate” or a means of continuing her existing “Estate”.

    I know of one State where civil action might be possible if defamation brought about the cancellation of sales or a marked decline in anticipated revenue that affects an estate. However, it would not be for defamation of a decedent and it applies more to estates which are companies/corporations.

    If it were me and I had to sue anyone for slander, my primary goal would be to clear the mark placed on my character. If there were laws which made defamation a criminal offense, I would file a criminal complaint instead. Addressing defamation in the Civil Courts and a monetary punishment was determine reasonable by our lawmakers. Money is great, but it can never make up for those pieces of you stolen due to slander.

    So much for that. I will ask and post a more comprehensive answer to your question.

     
  4. Dialdancer

    June 1, 2014 at 2:45 am

    If the defamation/disparagement of a decedent causes harm or diminishes the revenue of their Estate it directly affects the beneficiaries.

    If the decedent’s name or reputation is tied to their Estate which is a commercial venture then it is logical to conclude the defamation and/or commercial disparagement which harms revenue does adversely affect the beneficiaries

    A newly found legal term.: “Commercial Disparagement

    ““commercial disparagement.” Regardless of the particular label, a business has a legally viable claim against another for the oral or written publication of a disparaging statement concerning that business where:

    1. The statement is false;
    2. The publisher either intends the publication to cause financial loss or reasonably should recognize the publication would result in financial loss;

    3. Financial loss does in fact result; and
    4. The publisher either knows that the statement is false or acts in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity.

    http://www.defamationremovallaw.com/legal-resource-center/what-is-businesscommercial-disparagement/

    However, this still does not supply a remedy to damage done to a decedent’s character nor make provisions for a public denunciation of the defamer or a public apology from them.

    No civil suit which can be used for an Estate/commercial enterprise will take into account the number of times the defamer has transgressed. It will not take into account how wide spread the defamation has gone nor will it take into account the social or emotional toll on the beneficiaries.

     
  5. blythe5050

    July 6, 2016 at 5:04 pm

    It definitely should be looked into, since some Celebrities good name is all they have after death for the survivors to live off of. In slandering , it can deminish funding and the dead cannot defend themselves therefore it should be mute point to accuse someone who is no longer living of crimes that they cannot be charged with. Filing charges or civil suites against persons who previously have been found innocent in court and are deceased , after their estate has gained monetary value is contrived at best and greedy and immoral at worst.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: