The first story by reporter Tom Grant did not name Mohr, but named his store and showed Glen Burson, 44, talking about how the owner of the business tried to kick him out of the store and called sheriff's deputies. Burson, who has the mind of a 5-year-old, wanted to wash the windows of Mohr's store in exchange for candy.
Mohr, who refused two interview requests for that story, contended the story made him look like a bully. After the story aired, Mohr consented to be interviewed and the station ran three follow-up stories. The stories explained that Burson had threatened Mohr before and that Mohr had asked prosecutors to drop the charges.
Burson was eventually ruled incompetent to stand trial and the charges were dropped.
Mohr sued the station for defamation, saying the omission from the first story of facts that would have made him look more sympathetic -- such as Burson's alleged threat to shoot him in the head -- amounted to libel. A trial judge initially threw the case out.
In a 6-to-3 ruling, the state Supreme Court said the businessman did not have a case for defamation. ''Merely omitting facts favorable to the plaintiff or facts that the plaintiff thinks should have been included does not make a publication false and subject to defamation liability," Justice Mary Fairhurst wrote for the majority.
The court also noted that Mohr's refusal to talk to the reporter before the first newscast helped shape the story:
Fifteen media organizations filed briefs supporting KXLY.
''In effect, the plaintiff would require courts to become 'super editors' by sifting through a reporter's research and interviews and imposing damages on a truthful publication simply because the reporter has failed to 'spin' the facts reported in the story in favor of the plaintiff's viewpoint," Michele Earl-Hubbard, a lawyer representing the media groups, wrote in a brief.
