Defamation Civil Suits Brought by Law Enforcement Officers.

A false accusation against a police officer alleging the unlawful use of deadly force may be grounds for a civil suit against the officer’s accuser.    

In this era of heightened public sensitivity to police shootings and other law enforcement generated homicides, the officers involved in such an incident often find themselves being the target of a lot of hateful rhetoric, not uncommonly coming from public officials.   (The term “homicide” is defined as “the killing of a human being by another human being, whether lawful or not.”  Also, the term “victim” is meant here only to refer to the one who is killed by a police officer, and not meant to infer whether such a shooting was legally justified or not.)  When this occurs, the involved officers may feel helpless, with no way to defend themselves publicly, at least until they are sued and/or become the target of an actual criminal prosecution; neither one of which is a pleasant experience.  But a recently published case demonstrates how officers can go on the offensive rather than merely sit back and take it. 

In Miller v. Sawant (9th Cir. Nov. 10, 2021) 18 F.4th 328, it is described how Seattle police officers Scott Miller and Michael Spaulding shot and killed one Che Taylor.  The Seattle Police Department, the City’s Force Investigation Team, the City’s Firearms Review Board, and an inquest convened by the King County prosecutor, all cleared the officers of any punishable wrongdoing.  However, this little inconvenient truth didn’t stop Seattle City Council member Kshama Sawant from twice publicly pronouncing that Taylor’s death was the result of a “brutal (and) . . . blatant murder” perpetrated by the officers, demanding that they be brought to justice.  And although she didn’t use the officers’ names in her speeches, both officers were personally identified in corresponding news articles, leaving little to the imagination as to who it was she was accusing of murder.  Well, these officers decided they weren’t going to take being publicly slandered lying down.  In response to Sawant’s reckless accusations, they filed a federal 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit against her, alleging slander, and demanding actual and punitive damages.  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in reversing the district court’s dismissal of the case, held in Miller v. Sawant that it was not necessary for civil defendant Sawant to have specifically named the two officers in her speeches so long as her slanderous remarks could reasonably be interpreted to be “of and concerning” Officers Miller and Spaulding.  Whether the officers were sufficiently identified in the corresponding newspaper articles to meet this identification element is a question for a jury to decide—ruled the Court—and not the judge.  While this case involves the Ninth Circuit’s interpretation of the State of Washington’s civil law as it relates to slander and defamation, and the rules may be different under California law (I’m not a civil attorney and have neither the time nor interest to research this), it’s likely to be close enough that this decision can be used as authority for California law enforcement officers to fight back when defamed by over-exuberant civil servants (or anyone else) who go off half-cocked in demanding that cops be punished irrespective of the relevant facts.  I think it’s time to quit just turning the other cheek when falsely accused.  How about it?