Commonwealth v. Place

Citations

• 153 Pa. 314
• 26 A. 620
• 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1100

Syllabus

<p>[Marked to be reported.]</p> <p>Libel — Private scandal — Newspapers. ></p> <p>An article published in a newspaper setting forth in a sensational manner the details of a private scandal, where none of the parties referred to occupy any public position, and where neither of them has been charged before a magistrate or other public officer with any offence known to the laws, is libelous per se, and an indictment based upon it should not be quashed.</p> <p>It is no justification for a publication of this kind that rumors relating to the scandal were floating about in the neighborhood, and were known to a number of persons.</p> <p>Refusal of defendant to plead — Entry of plea by court.</p> <p>Where the defendant in an indictment for libel refuses to plead, the court may direct a plea of not guilty to be entered for him.</p> <p>Discretion of court as to severance of parties — Practice, O. P. — Review.</p> <p>Where two persons are indicted for the same offence, it is entirely within the discretion of the court below to determine whether they shall be given separate trials. The exercise of this discretion is not reviewable by the Supreme Court.</p> <p>It seems that in such a case, where one defendant is attempting to escape by throwing the blame on the other, there is no reason why the court should grant them separate trials.</p> <p>Evidence as to other libelous articles — Malice.</p> <p>Upon an indictment for the publication of a libel, the commonwealth may give in evidence other libelous articles regarding the same defendants or the same subject-matter, for the purpose of showing malice.</p> <p>Where the attention of the public is called to a libelous publication in advance by “squibs” or “dodgers,” the latter may be admitted in evidence, for the purpose of showing malice.</p>