I read that there is a campaign in the United States by Civil Rights/BLM campaigners to arrest/charge Carolyn Bryant Donham, who lied in 1955 and claimed that she had been wolf-whistled at and grabbed on the wrist by Emmett Till, a Black teenager who was subsequently lynched by two men. At their trial, she testified that she had been sexually harassed by Till, and the men were acquitted. Donham admitted to lying in an interview with a journalist.

What I find hard to understand about this campaign is that, even if she did lie, it's hard to see how she can be legally held responsible for two men taking it upon themselves to then murder him in revenge. Can a person be held responsible if their lie leads to a murder? If I falsely claim that person A did something relatively minor and negative to me, and person B then murders person A to avenge me, am I really (legally) responsible for that?

Of course, I'm assuming that she could be theoretically tried for perjury, but I doubt that would carry a huge sentence for a comparatively minor crime committed while young. Or is there a special charge for making false claims which are likely to lead to malevolent acts by others? Presumably, living in a society which was extremely racially-polarised and where lynchings were commonplace, she would have known that if she lied, negative consequences could occur - is that a relevant fact?


Perjury is a crime in Mississippi: the current penalty would be 10 years in prison. The First Amendment does not preclude a civil action for knowing act that cause harm to another. The statement is defamatory, and in this instance, the defamation cause great harm – death. It is not a total flight of fancy that she could be held liable for her defamatory statements.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    IANAL, but I thought that a dead person's estate can't sue for defamation on behalf of the decedent. – Matthew Cline Oct 22 at 5:37
  • So the consequences would be civil, rather than criminal (with the exception of committing perjury)? – Statsanalyst Oct 22 at 6:14
  • I'm not endorsing the position, I'm just indicating what direction a legal path lies in. – user6726 Oct 22 at 14:59

Legally, not at all

The US First Amendment guarantees free speech - such speech does not have to be truthful.

Now, there are limits to free speech including that you cannot incite violence. However, the Supreme Court established that unlawful speech must be "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action" in Brangdenburg v Ohio.

So, I can take to a podium and say "You should kill all {racial/ethnic/religious/socio-economic group of choixe}"; this is perfectly legal. However, if I hand you a loaded gun and say "Kill him"; that's not. The former does not incite imminent lawlessness, the latter does.

| improve this answer | |
  • This answer is not correct, due to the false testimony aspect aka perjury. – sharur Nov 22 at 7:07

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.