Another Nevada S. Ct. Decision as to #TheyLied Sexual Assault Defamation Claim Brought by Nickolas Carter (Backstreet Boys)

From Tuesday’s Nevada Supreme Court decision in Schuman Henschel v. Carter (for more on an earlier decision in Ruth v. Carter, see here):

This appeal arises out of a defamation countersuit brought by respondent Nickolas Carter against appellants Melissa and Jerome Schuman (collectively, the Schumans). Over the span of several years, the Schumans made statements about Carter’s alleged sexual assault of Melissa and other women. One of the other women, Shannon Ruth, sued Carter for sexual battery, and Carter countersued for defamation and related torts and joined the Schumans as counter-defendants. The Schumans filed an anti-SLAPP special motion to dismiss Carter’s claims against them….

[Under the Nevada anti-SLAPP statute, once a court determines that] “… the claim is based upon a good faith communication in furtherance of the right to petition or the right to free speech in direct connection with an issue of public concern[,]” … [the person making the claim must] show “with prima facie evidence a probability of prevailing on the claim.” …

“To prevail on a defamation claim, [a public figure] must show (1) a false and defamatory statement; (2) unprivileged publication to a third person; (3) fault; (4) damages, presumed or actual; and … (5) actual malice.” Actual malice is demonstrated when a statement “is published with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard for its veracity.” … “[T]o demonstrate by prima facie evidence a probability of success on the merits of a public figure defamation claim, the [non-moving party's] evidence must be sufficient for a jury, by clear and convincing evidence, to reasonably infer that the publication was made with actual malice.” …

The Schumans … claim that Carter’s declarations and evidence did not refute aspects of the allegations regarding the assault of Melissa, do not demonstrate that Melissa consented to sexual intercourse or that Jerome did not believe his daughter, and do not prove that the Schumans believed that Ruth’s account of being assaulted was untrue.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to him, we conclude Carter presented sufficient evidence that, if believed, would sustain a favorable verdict. Carter claimed that the Schumans fabricated Melissa’s sexual assault allegations and that they, alongside Ruth and his brother Aaron Carter, conspired to defame and extort him. He conceded that he had sexual intercourse with Melissa but asserted that the sex was consensual.

In support, Carter provided 92 exhibits, affidavits, and declarations directly contradicting or undermining Melissa’s allegations. For example, Carter provided a declaration from a witness present in the room on the night of the alleged rape that stated the witness saw Melissa and Carter flirting and playing with one another and that at no point did he witness Melissa upset or fearful, nor did he witness Carter act inappropriately toward her.

Carter also provided ample evidence suggesting Melissa changed her version of the events over the years, with pertinent details changing—such as whether she informed anyone in the days following the encounter or waited years, and whether she stopped working alongside Carter. All of this evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to Carter arguably demonstrate that the sexual interactions between him and Melissa were consensual, that Melissa knew she was not sexually assaulted, and that the Schumans, Ruth, and Aaron conspired to defame Carter.

The Schumans point to their own declarations in arguing that Carter could not demonstrate actual malice. Melissa provided a declaration detailing the alleged sexual assault, her belief that Ruth was being truthful regarding her own alleged assault by Carter, and that she did not “prey on” Aaron or Ruth or coach them with what to say. Jerome provided a declaration averring that he believed to be true Melissa’s recounting of the encounter and Ruth’s allegations of assault, and that he did not conspire with Melissa and Ruth to extort Carter.

While these declarations demonstrate that there may be genuine disputes of material facts in this case, this court cannot weigh the evidence but rather must consider the evidence in the light most favorable to Carter. Upon doing so, we conclude that Carter provided sufficient evidence that, if believed, shows that the Schumans published defamatory statements with knowledge that they were false or with reckless disregard for their veracity….

The post Another Nevada S. Ct. Decision as to #TheyLied Sexual Assault Defamation Claim Brought by Nickolas Carter (Backstreet Boys) appeared first on Reason.com.