Saturday, July 2, 2005

Lawyers make arguments in 'Bowling for Columbine' libel case

By Joanne Viviano / Associated Press

Comment on this story Send this story to a friend Get Home Delivery

DETROIT -- An attorney for James Nichols said Friday that filmmaker Michael Moore was malicious and deceitful in his treatment of the brother of Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nichols in the 2002 documentary "Bowling for Columbine."

But Moore's attorney argued during a hearing in Nichols' libel and defamation lawsuit that Nichols' claims "range from the frivolous to the silly."

Nichols, of Sanilac County, says the film falsely links him to the Oklahoma City bombing in the suit he has filed in U.S. District Court in Detroit.

Moore has asked that the case be dismissed. Judge Paul D. Borman said Friday that he will issue a decision after he reviews the case.

Nichols' attorney, Kenneth McIntyre, argued that Moore "offered half-truths or total untruths" to accuse Nichols of being an accomplice in the April 1995 bombing that killed 168 people. Terry Nichols is serving two life sentences without parole for his role in the bombing. Timothy McVeigh was executed in 2001 for masterminding the attack.

Moore attorney Herschel Fink said his client only reported the truth and his constitutionally protected opinion.

Among the items in question is Moore's use in the movie of the term "practice bombs" to refer to Nichols, along with Timothy McVeigh and brother Terry Nichols, making explosives on his Decker farm prior to the Oklahoma City bombing.

Also at issue is a reference in the movie that Nichols was arrested in connection with the bombing. McIntyre said Moore knew James Nichols only was held as a material witness and that later charges against him were not connected with bombing and eventually were dropped.

McIntyre said he also took issue with a phrase in the film that alleges federal agents couldn't get "the goods" on James Nichols, so they dropped charges against him. He said an audience would think Nichols was involved but somehow got out of it.

Fink called Nichols' complaint "the perfect storm of libel suits."

"And Mr. Nichols -- his claim -- is drowning in that perfect storm," he added.

He said Moore's reports are based on documents from court and other sources and items from reliable news outlets. He also argued that Moore's statements are protected because Nichols, who has written a book, given speeches and appeared in several media interviews, is a public figure.

"When you see a Michael Moore film, you know it's opinion," he said. "And it's protected."