Talk:Sam Sparks
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Sam Sparks libelled?
Karl Rove & Company's successful lawsuit against Dick Thornburgh is described in each man's Wikipedia article. Each description mentions that the judge, Sam Sparks, was an appointee of George H. W. Bush in a way that hints at impropriety. Alas, Times v Sullivan may have vitiated the judge's remedies under libel law.
The facts in the account may be, strictly speaking, true. But the facts are arranged in a way to imply wrongdoing. Even though neither article explicitly charges any wrongdoing, don't they, in effect, make an unsubstantiated charge of misbehavior against a living person?
Is this necessary, absent some evidence of malfeasance?
Mr Rove seems to be especially unpopular, but doesn't this language represent an unwarranted slur against Judge Sparks?

