Re: 1/12/01 - Complaint: James Van de Velde vs. The Hartford Courant, David Altimari and Eric Weiss
RETURN DATE: February 27, 2001 : SUPERIOR COURT
JAMES VAN DE VELDE : J. D. OF HARTFORD
VS. : AT HARTFORD
THE HARTFORD COURANT COMPANY, : JANUARY 12, 2001
DAVID ALTIMARI AND ERIC WEISS
COMPLAINT
1. Plaintiff James Van de Velde is a resident of Virginia.
2. Defendant Hartford Courant Company publishes, and at all relevant times published, the Hartford Courant, a daily newspaper based in Hartford, Connecticut.
3. Defendant David Altimari is, and at all relevant times was, a staff writer for the Hartford Courant.
4. Defendant Eric Weiss is, and at all relevant times was, a staff writer for the Hartford Courant.
5. In December 1998, plaintiff was employed as a faculty member in the Political Science department at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut. He enjoyed an excellent personal and professional reputation.
6. Beginning on December 9, 1998, plaintiff was the subject of numerous stories in the print and broadcast media identifying him as a suspect in the murder of Suzanne Jovin, a Yale student murdered on December 4, 1998.
7. Plaintiff vehemently denied any involvement in the Jovin murder, and continues to this day to maintain his innocence. No accusation has ever been brought against him.
8. On January 11, 1999, Yale University announced that it was relieving Van de Velde of his teaching duties for the Spring 1999 semester. Yale indicated that Van de Velde was, according to the New Haven Police, in a "pool of suspects" in the Jovin murder investigation. No other members of the "pool" were publicly identified.
9. This January 11, 1999 action and announcement spawned further intense media interest in plaintiff, and all aspects of his life. On January 12, 1998 the Courant reported the cancellation of plaintiff's classes, and identified him by name as a suspect in the Jovin murder investigation.
10. On January 13, 1999 the Hartford Courant published an article, authored by defendants Altimari and Weiss, entitled "From Pillar to Pariah", sub-titled "Yale Professor Combats Suspicions He Killed 'Inspiring' Senior." See Exhibit A attached. The article appeared on page A-1 of the Courant, as the paper's lead headline.
11. The article recounted plaintiff's personal and professional background. It specifically questioned Van de Velde's conduct with respect to two female television news reporters. The January 13th article stated that Van de Velde "was the target of police complaints filed by two local television reporters. Both filed complaints with New Haven police although no action was ever taken, sources said. In one case, Van de Velde was accused of looking into the windows at the home of one of the reporters, and constantly phoning her after she broke off a fledgling relationship, a police source said."
12. These statements were false, defamatory, and malicious.
13. The plaintiff requested in writing that the defendants retract these libelous statements, in as public a manner as that in which they were made, but said defendants failed to do so.
14. Media interest in the Jovin murder investigation, and plaintiff's status as the only named "suspect" in that investigation, intensified in the weeks and months following publication of the January 13th article. The allegation that plaintiff was the target of New Haven police complaints filed by women journalists has been repeated by others reporting on the story. It has been highlighted and emphasized in media stories seeking to explain how plaintiff, who had an excellent reputation and no history of misconduct, could be the lone named suspect in the Jovin investigation.
15. The false statements in the January 13th article furthered suspicion and public speculation that plaintiff could have been responsible for the death of Suzanne Jovin.
16. As a result of defendants' January 13th publication, plaintiff's good name and character have been greatly injured; he has been held up to public scrutiny and humiliation; he has been subjected to baseless innuendo attacking his character; his ability to find and keep employment has been severely affected; and he has suffered great mental anguish and embarrassment.
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims damages.
THE PLAINTIFF,
JAMES VAN DE VELDE
By____________________________________
David T. Grudberg
JACOBS, GRUDBERG, BELT & DOW, P.C.
His Attorney
RETURN DATE: February 27, 2001 : SUPERIOR COURT
JAMES VAN DE VELDE : J. D. OF HARTFORD
VS. : AT HARTFORD
THE HARTFORD COURANT COMPANY, : JANUARY 12, 2001
DAVID ALTIMARI AND ERIC WEISS
STATEMENT OF AMOUNT IN DEMAND
The amount in demand, exclusive of interest and costs, is more than Fifteen
Thousand ($15,000.00) Dollars.
THE PLAINTIFF,
JAMES VAN DE VELDE
By____________________________________
David T. Grudberg
JACOBS, GRUDBERG, BELT & DOW, P.C.
His Attorney
|
