Courtney Love’s facing a civil trial in February for tweeting that fashion designer Dawn Simorangkir was a drug-pushing prostitute. If you’re looking to be a defamation defendant, that’s a good way to do it. Almost as on target as these folks.
Apparently Simorangkir was in a spat with Love over unpaid bills on a few thousand bucks worth of clothes.
I know an attorney in LA who sued Love a few years ago over unpaid wages owed to his clients. It was pretty funny to hear him describe his troubles in trying to serve the papers on her. I think he finally got her cornered at the Grammys.
But back to Simorangkir v. Love. THR, Esq. reports that Love may be planning a sort of insanity defense:
Love’s attorneys have their own witnesses, including a medical expert who plans to testify that even if Love’s statements were untrue, her mental state was not “subjectively malicious” enough to justify the defamation lawsuit.
That claim — something akin to an insanity defense for social media — suggests that Twitter was so appealing and addictive for Love that she had no appreciation for how the comments she posted would be received by others.
That’s just funny. And it really makes it sound like Love’s going down in flames. The only thing that makes Love’s litigation prospects look dimmer is this quote from her lawyer:
“We don’t believe there’s any defamation, and even if there were defamatory statements, there was no damage,” says James Janowitz, an attorney for Love.
But, you know, assuming just like THEORETICALLY that it’s defamatory to accuse someone of being a drug-pushing prostitute, we feel there’s a good backup argument on damages. Yikes.
Read the whole thing from Matt Belloni in THR, Esq. It’s totally worth it.