Network Ten acted in bad faith when it posted a retraction at the bottom of its Terms of Use page after settling a defamation case with a man whose partner died from injecting silicone into his scrotum, a judge has ruled.
American Dylan Hafertepen sued Ten over a segment on The Project in November 2018 that explored the death of his Australian partner Jack Chapman.
The cameras rolled as Jack’s mother Linda Chapman accused Mr Hafertepen of being responsible for her son’s death and told him “Get out of my house, I hate you,” as he visited her to hand over his ashes.
The couple had lived in Seattle and frequently posted blogs about their dominant/submissive relationship, in which Mr Hafertepen had the role of “master” and Mr Chapman one of his “pups”.
Mr Chapman changed his name to Tank Hafertepen before his death, but was named in the lawsuit as Jack Chapman.
Mr Hafertepen alleged in court that the “over-sensationalised” broadcast - reported by now-Q&A host Hamish Macdonald -suggested he was to blame for the death, and he had been tricked into giving the interview under false pretences.
The case settled earlier this year, but landed straight back in court when Ten published a “clarification” at the bottom of its “Terms of Use” page.
“To say the least, this was an obscure location,” Federal Court Justice Anna Katzmann wrote in Monday’s judgment.
The wording of the clarification, agreed by the parties, states Ten did not mean to suggest Mr Hafertepen had “anything to do with that death”.
“If anyone took it to mean that, then Network 10 unreservedly retracts any such suggestion,” it reads in part.
Justice Katzmann said the lawyer who posted the apology, Myles Farley, was “often evasive” as he gave evidence.
She rejected Mr Farley’s claim that the Terms of Use page was the “most logical” and “most appropriate” location for the statement.
“The most rational explanation for his choice of location was that he thought it was in Ten’s best interests to bury it where it was unlikely to be found,” she wrote.
Part of the settlement also required Ten to send letters to media organisations who covered the story, advising them they had taken the story down and asking them to do the same or to add a clarification.
Justice Katzmann also hit out at the broadcaster for refusing to send copies of those letters to Mr Hafertepen’s lawyers.
After a back-and-forth, Ten said the letters could be viewed in person at a legal office.
“It is bewildering that in 2020, during a global pandemic, Ten would insist that Mr Hafertepen’s lawyer attend the office of Ten’s lawyers to inspect the letters to the media organisations,” she wrote.
Justice Katzmann ordered Ten to repost the statement on a main landing page for The Project and to pay costs.
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7r7HWrGWcp51jrrZ7xaKlmqaTmnyjwdKipZ6ro2S6prDImmatnZ5iwK2tzKacnWWSrnqrwcOgnGaen6d6qbXDoqWgZZSas6K5wK2gqKZdqMGiwMSmnKesXaS7bsDEq6SsZZ%2Bbera%2FxGanmp%2BVZLumw9Jmqq2noq58o7CRa5hqbJJthaSulZ5onGpim4Vzr8VramloZpaCo7A%3D