The Terre Haute Tribune-Star is appealing a $1.5 million defamation verdict it received from a local jury. Steve Key, general counsel for the Hoosier State Press Association, calls that amount the largest libel award in Indiana’s history.

The Tribune-Star calls the verdict “excessive” and “outrageous.” That’s exactly what it is, but it’s also a detriment to free speech and shouldn’t be tolerated on appeal.

Disclosure: The Tribune-Star is owned by CNHI media, the same parent company as The Herald Bulletin. But such a verdict affects all newspapers in their duty to be a watchdog on government officials.

The Tribune-Star wrote articles four years ago about Clay County Sheriff’s detective Jeff Maynard after a driver swore allegations of misconduct against the detective. The newspaper published these allegations. Those allegations turned out to be false after an investigation by the Indiana State Police.

The newspaper published a story about that investigation, but Maynard’s attorney, Eric Frey, wasn’t interested in including that article during the civil trial. He only used the articles he thought were detrimental to his client. But wouldn’t a jury see through that? Apparently not in this case.

Frey said the newspaper’s motion for appeal was akin to saying the jury had no right to decide the case, and he would ask the judge to deny the motion. The state has appellate courts to review lower court decisions. An appeal is fundamental in legal matters.

In order to prove libel, a public official, such as Maynard, must show that the newspaper knew it was publishing false information about Maynard. Clearly that wasn’t the case, and it’s shocking that a trial even took place.

As Tribune-Star Publisher Jeremiah Turner told The Associated Press, “We feel the articles accurately and neutrally reported allegations of police misconduct and the ensuing investigation. We just don’t feel that evidence shows the stories were published with actual malice.”

The Tribune-Star attorneys surely pointed out the famous New York Times v. Sullivan Supreme Court case in 1964 when the court ruled that a public official had to show actual malice or that the newspaper knowingly printed falsehoods in libel cases. Again, there was no proof of this.

The publication of the investigation article should have exonerated the Tribune-Star, and it’s telling that Frey and the jury weren’t interested in the article.

Without the Times v. Sullivan ruling, local officials would be dragging newspapers to court anytime they felt slighted or were upset at what was written. The effect on newspapers would be catastrophic as they would employ self-censorship so they wouldn’t run afoul of the whims of elected officials.

As a result, people wouldn’t get the news they need about their officials. That can’t happen, and that’s precisely why the myopic ruling of a local jury will have to be overturned on appeal by cooler heads concerned about a free press.