Does a defendant have to prove truth in order to avoid liability for defamation?

No, a defendant in the state of Washington does not have to prove truth in order to avoid liability for defamation. Instead, the defendant can prove a number of other defense strategies in order to avoid liability. For example, a defendant can prove an opinion, which is protected under the law and does not constitute as defamation. The defendant can also prove that the statement made is true, in which case it is also protected under the law. Additionally, the defendant can prove that the statement was made without any kind of intention of harm, or that the statement was privileged and made for the purpose of furthering an investigation or producing a fair outcome. Finally, the defendant can prove that the statement was made in an effort to protect the public from harm, or with regards to a matter of public interest. As such, defendants do not have to prove truth in order to avoid liability for defamation in the state of Washington.

Related FAQs

What is the standard of proof in a defamation lawsuit?
How can a person protect himself or herself from defamation?
Is a statement considered defamatory if it is made to a third party?
Is there a limit to the amount of punitive damages a person can receive in a defamation suit?
Is a plaintiff required to show actual damages in a defamation case?
What kinds of statements constitute defamation?
Is it possible to win a defamation lawsuit without proving actual harm?
Are Internet service providers held liable for defamatory content published on their networks?
Can a person be sued for defamation if the statement was made in an email?
Are there any restrictions on the type of evidence that can be used in a defamation case?

Does a defendant have to prove truth in order to avoid liability for defamation?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts