In July 2022, a former Virginia state senator, Brandon Bell, and his wife, Deborah Bell, sent a letter on state Senate letterhead accusing a 15-year-old Cave Spring High School student of sexually assaulting their daughter. Three years later, a Roanoke County jury ruled that the Bells’ accusations were not only false but defamatory per se, and awarded the plaintiff, Jane Doe, $1 million in damages plus pre-judgment interest.
Background: The dispute traces back to 2021, when Jane Doe, then a high school sophomore, and the Bells’ daughter, began a same-sex relationship after meeting in band. Both testified that the relationship involved kissing, hugging, and hand-holding, but no sexual activity.
The Bells’ daughter eventually disclosed the relationship to her parents, who instructed their daughter to break off the relationship. A few weeks later, the Bells’ daughter reported to them that Jane Doe had touched her back because her hands were cold, and Jane Doe had kissed her without asking for consent.
The Bells reported these events to the school principal as sexual assaults. But when the principal spoke to the Bells’ daughter, she did not corroborate the sexual assault allegations and admitted that she had lied to her parents about continuing the relationship with Jane Doe. The principal relayed that information back to the Bells.
Despite this, four months later the Bells drafted a letter, sent on Mr. Bell’s retired Senate letterhead, accusing Jane Doe of sexually assaulting his daughter “on two occasions” at their high school. He copied the entire Roanoke County School Board, the state superintendent of education, the secretary of education, and several state legislators. Jane Doe filed suit for defamation, defamation per se and insulting words.
Defamation Per Se: Virginia recognizes certain categories of false statements as defamation per se, including false allegations of (1) a crime of moral turpitude; (2) contagious diseases; (3) related to a person’s fitness to perform their job; or (4) that directly harm the person’s ability to earn a living in their profession or trade.
A crime of moral turpitude is a crime involving lying, cheating, or stealing or a crime that is punishable by imprisonment or an act otherwise base and vile and against community standards. The Court ruled that false allegations of sexual assault are defamatory per se – thus damages were presumed.
Jane Doe nonsuited the defamation and insulting words claims and proceeded only on the defamation per se claim.
Qualified Privilege: One of the central legal questions was whether the Bells’ communications were shielded by the qualified privilege. Virginia law recognizes a privilege when a person makes a statement to others who share a corresponding interest or duty in the subject matter — in this case, parents communicating with school officials about their child’s welfare.
The Court ruled that the Bells’ letter initially qualified for this protection.
A plaintiff can overcome the privilege by proving by clear and convincing evidence that the defendants abused the privilege. The defendants abuse the privilege when they make the statement (1) knowing it was false or with a reckless disregard for the truth; (2) to additional persons having no interest or duty in the subject matter; (3) in bad faith; (4) with unnecessarily insulting words or strong language disproportionate to the circumstances; or (5) out of personal ill will, spite or hatred.
At trial, the two main issues on liability were whether the sexual assault allegations were false and whether the Bells abused the privilege. In making the first determination, the jury relied on “the common understanding” in the community. The evidence showed that the cold hand on the back incident was not sexual in nature, and was a joke rather than an intentional, unwanted touching. The evidence also showed that while Jane Doe did not ask permission to kiss the Bells’ daughter, they had previously kissed and the Bells’ daughter wrote Jane Doe a note a couple days before the kiss, saying she could not wait to kiss Jane Doe again.
The evidence also showed that the Bells had no information to suggest either incident was a sexual assault and the principal informed them that their daughter had confessed to lying about continuing the relationship. The Bells never took their daughter to the police until after Jane Doe filed her lawsuit and over 250 days after the alleged assaults occurred. The evidence also showed that the visit was not out of concern for their daughter — but instead to stop the lawsuit.
The Bells tried to frame their actions as simply those of concerned parents. In doing so, they blamed their daughter for lying to them, and they blamed the principal and other school officials for not addressing their concerns in a manner that satisfied them.
After three days of trial, the jury found both of the Bells liable for defamation per se and that both of them abused the privilege. They awarded Jane Doe $500,000 in compensatory damages, $500,000 in punitive damages, and also awarded pre-judgment interest.