Thomas H. Oehmke v. Patrick Andrew Guinan

First Amendment constitutional protections for free speech, as applied by this Court in New York Times Co. vs. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964) require a federal rule that imposes liability for defamation on a speaker who knowingly and maliciously relates a false criminal report to law enforcement. The Majority Rule, as applied in 34 jurisdictions (by 31 State courts and 3 Federal Circuits), grants a qualified privilege to relators of crime reports made in good faith and without actual malice. Differently here, the Michigan Supreme Court followed the Minority Rule (adhered to in only 4 other States) upholding absolute immunity for a relator who knowingly and maliciously makes a false crime report to the FBI. The questions presented are: Qualified Privilege for FBI Crime Tips Under the First Amendment, should there be a qualified privilege (instead of absolute immunity) for relators who post FBI Internet online crime tips? Liability for Maliciously False Tips Under the standard of qualified privilege, should there be liability for relators who post FBI Internet crime tips when the “facts” posted are knowingly false or made with reckless disregard for truth or falsity?