Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 28 views

    US v. Felipe Bustos

    Uploaded by

    Jairus Adrian Vilbar
    This case involves Felipe Bustos who was charged with libel against Roman Punsalan, a justice of the peace in Pampanga, Philippines. Citizens had assembled a petition and affidavits charging Punsalan with malfeasance in office and requesting his removal. Punsalan denied the charges. The court found that express malice was not proven by the prosecution. While the charges were likely untrue, the petitioners believed them to be true and acted in good faith to remove a perceived corrupt official. Their actions were justified and did not abuse free speech privileges. The court ruled in favor of Bustos.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    US v. Felipe Bustos

    Uploaded by

    Jairus Adrian Vilbar
    28 views1 page
    This case involves Felipe Bustos who was charged with libel against Roman Punsalan, a justice of the peace in Pampanga, Philippines. Citizens had assembled a petition and affidavits charging Punsalan with malfeasance in office and requesting his removal. Punsalan denied the charges. The court found that express malice was not proven by the prosecution. While the charges were likely untrue, the petitioners believed them to be true and acted in good faith to remove a perceived corrupt official. Their actions were justified and did not abuse free speech privileges. The court ruled in favor of Bustos.

    Original Description:

    a

    Original Title

    95. US v. Felipe Bustos

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves Felipe Bustos who was charged with libel against Roman Punsalan, a justice of the peace in Pampanga, Philippines. Citizens had assembled a petition and affidavits charging Punsalan with malfeasance in office and requesting his removal. Punsalan denied the charges. The court found that express malice was not proven by the prosecution. While the charges were likely untrue, the petitioners believed them to be true and acted in good faith to remove a perceived corrupt official. Their actions were justified and did not abuse free speech privileges. The court ruled in favor of Bustos.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    28 views1 page

    US v. Felipe Bustos

    Uploaded by

    Jairus Adrian Vilbar
    This case involves Felipe Bustos who was charged with libel against Roman Punsalan, a justice of the peace in Pampanga, Philippines. Citizens had assembled a petition and affidavits charging Punsalan with malfeasance in office and requesting his removal. Punsalan denied the charges. The court found that express malice was not proven by the prosecution. While the charges were likely untrue, the petitioners believed them to be true and acted in good faith to remove a perceived corrupt official. Their actions were justified and did not abuse free speech privileges. The court ruled in favor of Bustos.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    US V.

    FELIPE BUSTOS

    Facts:

    In the latter part of 1915, numerous citizens of the Province of Pampanga assembled, and prepared and
    signed a petition to the Executive Secretary through the law office of Crossfield & O'Brien, and five
    individuals signed affidavits, charging Roman Punsalan, justice of the peace of Macabebe and Masantol,
    Pampanga, with malfeasance in office and asking for his removal. The justice of the peace was notified
    and denied the charges.

    Issues:

    Whether or not the defendants and appellants are guilty of a libel of Roman Punsalan, justice of the
    peace of Macabebe and Masantol, Province of Pampanga.

    Ruling:

    Express malice has not been proved by the prosecution, further, although the charges are probably not
    true as to the justice of the peace, they were believed to be true by the... petitioners. Good faith
    surrounded their action. Probable cause for them to think that malfeasance or misfeasance in office
    existed is apparent. The ends and the motives of these citizens to secure the removal from office of a
    person thought to be venal were justifiable. In no... way did they abuse the privilege.

    The interest of society and the maintenance of good government demand a full discussion of public
    affairs. Complete liberty to comment on the conduct of

    public men is a scalpel in the case of free speech. Criticism does not authorize defamation. Nevertheless,
    as the individual is less than the State, so must expected criticism be born for the common good.

    As a general rule... words imputing to a judge or a justice of the peace dishonesty or corruption or
    incapacity or misconduct touching him in his office are actionable. But as suggested in the beginning we
    do not have present a simple case of direct and vicious accusations published in the press, but of
    charges predicated on affidavits made to the proper official and thus qualifiedly privileged. Malicious
    and untrue communications are not privilege

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy