Well-known Dominican journalist Carlisle Jno Baptiste said he feels vindicated after he won a nine-year court battle with a local newspaper over defamation.
A relieved Jno Baptiste said although the matter took years before the court, he was always confident that he had a strong case.
“Nine years by any stretch of the imagination is a long time but with God all things are possible,” he stated. “At the end of the day, I feel vindicated….the judgment is very clear and well written…so finally I feel vindicated. I feel happy.”
The matter goes back to June 2014 when The Chronicle, a weekly newspaper, and its publisher, Chronicle Media Group Inc, printed an article under its column & “Nabes and I,” entitled “A Moder’s Love,” in which, according to court documents, Jno Baptiste alleged that there were “several statements which referred to him by reference to a “Canlie Jellsanti” and that the statements published were false and malicious and were libelous of him.”
He initiated court proceedings against The Chronicle and its publisher on February 25, 2015, during which he claimed “damages, including aggravated and exemplary damages, an injunction restraining the Defendants from further publishing the offending words, interest, costs, and other reliefs.”
Jno Baptiste also stated that as a journalist, “and as a result of his actual and/or perceived political opinions, by reason of this publication calculated to cause and did cause him to suffer embarrassment and humiliation, the publication constitutes a vicious and deliberate attack on his reputation which caused injury to his character and reputation and made him subject to ridicule, odium, and contempt.”
In its defense, The Chronicle denied the allegations by Jno Baptiste saying the statements in the article bore no defamatory sense. It said the Nabes and I article was a satirical and comical “‘story-telling’ literary piece “meant to comment on current events and topics in an amusing and entertaining way.”
It also said that the character, Canlie Jellsanti, was not intended to refer to Jno Baptiste or to any other person since it was a fictional character just like any other character in the article.
The 2nd defendant, Paramount Printers, admitted to printing the article but claimed that it had no idea of its content at the time of printing.
In a 35-page ruling on the matter, High Court Judge Jacqueline Josiah-Graham concluded that, “In all the circumstances, I am satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, the Claimant’s (Jno Baptiste) case against the First Defendant (The Chronicle) succeeds; the First Defendant defamed the Claimant by the publication in the “Nabes and I” Column of The Chronicle Newspaper dated the 27th June, 2014 by statement (d) as particularised in the Amended Statement of Claim dated 30th March 2015 at paragraph 8. I also find that the statement references the Claimant in disparaging terms constituting libel.”
She said that while libel is a serious matter, there was no evidence to show that there was significant damage to Jno Baptiste’s reputation or standing.
She pointed out that two witnesses who testified on Jno Baptiste’s behalf said they maintained good relations with him even after the article was published.
“None of the Claimant’s witnesses testified that the article caused them to lower their esteem of the Claimant, or that they shunned him, or that they are no longer friends with him,” the judge wrote. “They both testify that they remained his friends even after the publication of the column.”
She said she believes that the loss Jno Baptiste suffered “rests substantially on the injury to his feelings and distress caused to the injury to his reputation.”
“The impact of the statements to the Claimant, on the evidence presented on a balance of probabilities, is therefore limited to his hurt feelings and distress,” she wrote. “The evidence provided fails to prove any financial or other loss but rather illustrates how he felt by the people he accused of shunning him after the publication of the column. Accordingly, the Court holds that the extent of the publication of the statements on the Claimant is limited to his emotional distress and hurt feelings, as per the available evidence and on a balance of probabilities.”
The Chronicle was ordered to pay $15,000 with statutory interest at the rate of five percent awarded on the sum from the date of judgment to the date of full settlement of payment and $7,500 to Jno Baptiste in prescribed costs.
Jno Baptiste was also ordered to pay $2,500 to the printer in prescribed costs. Meanwhile, the journalist said the message from the entire matter is very clear.
“The message is clear that you cannot go saying all kinds of nasty and vicious things about people under all kinds of names and think you are going to get away,” he stated. “That is the message, people must stop that, those who are printing must stop that.”
Well you won your case brother. Other than that, i don’t listen to you and your journalism crap. You are acturn off. You don’t sound like a journalist at all, at all at all..
I empathize with you Mr Baptiste. Who feels it knows the searing pain.
The injustices, injury to my feelings, my young fiancée, my elderly mother, and others , 24/7 harassment, stoning and Molotov attacks at nights, attempts at arson, distress, defamation in the Chronicle, the Herald, egregious loss of properties, outright looted, several warehouses, residential properties . I was unceremoniously uprooted from my homeland that people like me, Nugent, suffered at the hands of rioters stirred up, ordered and led by the Freedom Party Coupists on their way to rule and form the 1980 government. They sure got away with it. MURDER! Not even an apology 43 years later.
Good to discover their is some sensitivity in the Dominique legal system in 2024. My blessings Mr Carlisle.
carlisle too likes a roro and too unfriendly like another journalist turn politician
Who is Canlie,and what is Jellsantie?Maybe Jno Baptiste is Jellsantie or Canlie.I know once you tell a lie about somebody in a manner to defame and offend them is wrong.Jell santie Lord have mercy.