Deputy Commissioner of Police Edward Broaster has won a major libel case against attorney Oscar Selgado. The Supreme Court has ruled that Selgado must pay Broaster $42,500 dollars because he unfairly slandered him on national television.
Back in May 2015, when Broaster was a Senior Superintendent in charge of Eastern Division, Selgado blasted him on the evening news - making aspersions against Broaster. He also accused Broaster of inappropriate behavior as a member of law enforcement.
In response, Broaster sued him for libel and slander, and after months of litigation, Justice Michelle Arana made a ruling yesterday. She found that Broaster and his attorney Mikhail Arguelles proved their case against Selgado. The judge ordered the attorney to pay Broaster $30,000, plus an additional $12,500 in court costs.
It's a major win for Broaster, and this evening, he told us that he has to protect his reputation from any instance of slander:
Edward Broaster, Claimant
"I'd like to say thanks to my attorney Michael Arguelles for successfully getting a resolution to this case. In 2015 the attorney made some statements on national television which eventually ended up on facebook stating that I made certain comments which I never ever did made and for too long attorneys get on the media and tell a lot of lies, some of them cover themselves properly because they don't really call names and so on, but this one did and he was given the opportunity to apologized and he refused to apologized, hence the reason why we proceeded to deal with the matter in court and I am glad that the judge found it necessary to award judgement in our favour. I value my name very dearly, my family. My father was a police officer, I have other police brothers that are in the police department and we value our name. Our name means a lot to us. We never put ourselves in the position where we would bring our name into disrepute and for individuals to just get up and try to repute your character and those sort of things, are just plain wrong and it does not only affect us as individuals when that is done, it affects our families, it affects our friends, it affects everyone that looks up to us. So am not going toi be holding any punches when people slander or liable me in public."
In her judgment, Justice Arana commented on Selgado's defense against the claim.
She said, quote, "I… found it disturbing that that the defendant himself did not testify; that is his right, but I would think that as a trained attorney at law, Mr. Oscar Selgado would have welcomed the opportunity to let the court hear from him directly in answering to this serious claim of libel and slander brought against him, and to have his evidence tested by cross examination… He chose to remain silent, and that is his right, so I say no more on that." End quote.
We also note that there is another libel issue that Broaster has raised against a private citizen, for comments he made in a press conference, but which was not broadcast in the media. He says that his attorney will be contacting this individual demanding an apology, and if none is forthcoming, then he will be bringing another lawsuit.
Email
Print