data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e4ce3/e4ce30c8b7ab2a23345b94ca092fbc0c4d1cafc6" alt="NBA Refs vs. Writers. Or, Bill Spooner is not a happy camper. NBA Refs vs. Writers. Or, Bill Spooner is not a happy camper."
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8ff8c/8ff8c8f6b3c04c5aa07108b62cb5b3a7f681b377" alt="NBA Refs vs. Writers. Or, Bill Spooner is not a happy camper. NBA Refs vs. Writers. Or, Bill Spooner is not a happy camper."
The incident revolves around a foul called on Anthony Tolliver, which infuriated Rambis and the Timberwolves. Spooner told Rambis that he would review the call at half-time; in response, Rambis said something along the lines of: “well, that is great and everything, but I want my two points back.” In the lawsuit, Spooner claims that he did not respond to Rambis, but Krawczynski, who was sitting courtside, obviously says otherwise. Spooner made three foul calls in only 40 seconds. Based on replays, it seems clear that the call on Tolliver was atrocious; the two later calls, however, are much harder to nail, and if anything, seem correct.
I find the whole case super intriguing. It is strange that a referee is suing a writer, which takes the actual game outside the hardwood and into a totally different court. It is even weirder that the lawsuit is over a tweet. You would not think that 140 characters could be so damaging. I find it especially interesting because, until the lawsuit was filed, no one would have ever known about the tweet, and therefore, the alleged defamation. It is almost like Spooner defamed himself by bringing the lawsuit, because it, in effect, spread the “rumor” or misinformation to millions more people than originally would have heard it.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5b335/5b335d9ae7c29bb9fba50b14617e156c2d87dc49" alt="NBA Refs vs. Writers. Or, Bill Spooner is not a happy camper. NBA Refs vs. Writers. Or, Bill Spooner is not a happy camper."
Generally speaking, defamation, which consists of both slander and libel, is a very difficult thing to prove in court. Slander, according to Black’s Law Dictionary, is a defamatory statement expressed orally. Libel, on the other hand, is a published defamatory statement that identifies an individual by name. If the defamatory statement is made via broadcast media – such as the radio, television, or internet – it is considered libel, rather than slander, because it has the potential to reach a large audience. Thus, if Krawczynski has committed any civil tort, he has committed libel. To prevail, defamation must be an intentionally false communication that injures another's reputation. It includes statements that bring ridicule, scorn, or contempt to an individual in a substantial part of the community. A statement is considered particularly defamatory, or defamation per se, if it concerns one’s profession, health, chastity, criminality, or moral turpitude. So it is especially bad if you talk shit about someone’s job, spread rumors that they are going to die soon, call them a dirty whorebag, or claim that they are a child molester. Here, the tweet directly related to Spooner’s professional duties as a referee, and relayed information as fact instead of opinion, which is more problematic for Krawczynski from a legal perspective.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b7410/b741001ecf46b80882be20030a5415319dfb29dc" alt="NBA Refs vs. Writers. Or, Bill Spooner is not a happy camper. NBA Refs vs. Writers. Or, Bill Spooner is not a happy camper."
Even if Spooner is considered a private citizen, Krawczynski may still be protected under the law. If he can show that the tweet was only a reasonable mistake, he would not be found liable; but this defense would fail if Spooner demonstrates that the tweet was intentionally exaggerated and purposely spread. There is no doubt that the tweet was purposely spread, as it was posted on Twitter; but it would be nearly impossible to show that the tweet was intentionally exaggerated. It seems that Spooner builds a foundation for this argument in the complaint, as he claims that Krawczynski has a past history of irrationally criticizing refs. Still, it is a weak leg to stand on. Even stranger, the entire lawsuit will be rendered moot if Rambis affirms that Spooner DID, in fact, say that he would give him a make-up call. Truth is an absolute defense to defamation and the best-case scenario for Krawczynski.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ebed8/ebed84fb388a015f3fdbd2b2ea4e82e351056077" alt="NBA Refs vs. Writers. Or, Bill Spooner is not a happy camper. NBA Refs vs. Writers. Or, Bill Spooner is not a happy camper."