Opinion ID: 1376401
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Are Devlin's Statements a Matter of Public Concern?

Text: A statement regarding matters of public concern must be provable as false before a defamation action can lie. Milkovich, 497 U.S. at 16, 19-20 & n. 6, 110 S.Ct at 2704, 2706 & n. 6. Because truth is an affirmative defense, the burden of proving falsity lies only on those plaintiffs who are defamed by speech that is a matter of public concern. As a threshold, therefore, we must determine whether Devlin's speech falls within this category. `Whether ... speech addresses a matter of public concern must be determined by [the expression's] content, form, and context ... as revealed by the whole record.' Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc., 472 U.S. 749, 761, 105 S.Ct. 2939, 2946, 86 L.Ed.2d 593 (1985) (plurality opinion) (quoting Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 147-48, 103 S.Ct. 1684, 1690, 75 L.Ed.2d 708 (1983)). Devlin's letter criticizes a police officer acting in his official capacity. [6] It is difficult to conceive an area of greater public interest than law enforcement. Certainly the public has a legitimate interest in the manner in which law enforcement officers perform their duties. Godbehere, 162 Ariz. at 343, 783 P.2d at 789. In deciding that a common law privilege [7] extends to complaints of police misconduct, Maryland's highest court spoke to the importance of such complaints: Our society vests its law-enforcement officers with formidable power, the abuse of which is often extremely detrimental to the public interest. Citizen complaints of such abuses, and the administrative disciplinary procedure which has been developed to investigate these complaints, serve a public function of vital importance by providing a mechanism through which abuses may be reported to the proper authorities, and the abusers held accountable. The viability of a democratic government requires that the channels of communication between citizens and their public officials remain open and unimpeded. Miner v. Novotny, 304 Md. 164, 498 A.2d 269, 274-75 (1985). We are not unmindful of the detrimental effect that false reports of police misconduct have on a police officer. See Miner, 498 A.2d at 275. This concern, however, does not make the subject any less public. Because there is a great need for uninhibited dialogue concerning the actions of so important an arm of government, especially with regard to the treatment of children, we hold that Devlin's comments involve matters of public concern. These statements, therefore, must be provable as false before a defamation action can lie. [8]