NewsChannel 5 and Phil Williams filed a motion this week asking a judge to dismiss Davidson County District Attorney Glenn Funk's $200 million defamation lawsuit against them "for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted."
To translate: They argue, essentially, that Funk's lawsuit is bogus. Additionally, a memorandum from their attorneys says Funk's suit is an attempt to "silence and intimidate a journalist and news organization."
Funk filed the suit last month after Williams and NewsChannel 5 reported a story — one also independently reported by the Scene and WSMV — on allegations from an ongoing civil suit involving David Chase, the developer who was charged with assaulting his ex-girlfriend twice in 24 hours less than two years ago. Those charges were eventually dropped.
But documents from an ongoing suit, in which Chase has accused an array of individuals with conspiring against him, contain allegations of extortion, blackmail and possible bribery, implicating Funk and veteran Democratic political operative Bill Fletcher. The revelations included the fact, since acknowledged by Funk, that the district attorney agreed to drop the criminal charges against Chase on the condition that Chase dismiss his federal lawsuit against the Metro Nashville Police Department and a group of individual officers.
Funk and Fletcher have both denied any wrongdoing.
A day after NewsChannel 5's initial story, Funk filed the lawsuit accusing the station and Williams of libel, defamation and false light. He seeks $200 million in damages, which Funk's attorneys said would be donated to non-profits that protect victims of domestic assault and abuse.
In a motion to dismiss the suit filed this week, NewsChannel 5's attorneys write that Funk's complaint "must be dismissed because the allegations reported in the news stories at issue are constitutionally protected speech, are privileged as a fair and accurate report of the allegations made in another lawsuit and do not contain any false and defamatory statements concerning the plaintiff."
A memorandum accompanying the motion — posted here by NewsChannel 5 — describes Funk's suit as "an attempt by an elected public official to silence and intimidate a journalist and news organization that has accurately reported on questionable conduct and judgment by that official." The memo also notes the reports on the same allegations by WSMV and the Scene. Neither outlet has been sued by Funk over those reports.
"This news coverage demonstrates that the underlying controversy is a matter of public concern, the memo reads. "Additionally, the similarity of other news media coverage illustrates that Defendants' news report was a fair report on the allegations being made in deposition testimony in a pending high-profile court case."
Several weeks ago Funk's initial complaint was amended to include follow-up stories on the allegations and fallout from NewsChannel 5. You can read the amended complaint here.
The amended complaint accuses NewsChannel 5 and Williams of "pursuing a vendetta against Mr. Funk since he became the District Attorney" — and indeed the two have a relationship that predates this round of stories. Little more than a year ago, in February 2015, Williams reported Funk had accepted a job with the state as a special prosecutor before he was sworn in, allowing him to qualify for a sweeter pension plan. State Attorney General Herbert Slatery announced in December that although Funk had broken the law, he didn't know that at the time and would not be prosecuted.
Pith asked Sonja West, a law professor at the University of Georgia specializing in constitutional law, media law and the U.S. Supreme Court and a former journalist, for her take on Funk's suit against Williams and NewsChannel 5. She declined to get into specific details of the case but offered this statement:
"Because this case involves a public official and a matter of public concern, he faces an uphill battle," West wrote. "He has the burden of proving that the stories were false and that the reporters either knew what they were publishing was false or had a reckless disregard as to whether it is false. Most states, moreover, also protect the press from defamation lawsuits as long as they have fairly and accurately reported the contents of an official government document like those involved in court proceedings."
Ben Gershman, a professor at Pace Law School in White Plains, N.Y., told The Tennessean last month that the suit "seems like the lawsuit is more for PR purposes than realistically seeking vindication in the courtroom."
