Libel Question

[RCharleston]

If an artist were to produce unflattering/derogatory imagery of a person not considered to have any "celebrity" or "public persona" status, even to the degree that captions attached to such images included the person's proper name, would the artist risk being successfully sued if the aforementioned imagery was being used strictly as private studies/rough drafts for more nonspecific, "anonymous" works and was never intended to see the light of day? A real-world example here would be the person with an artistic bent working out past life issues (ie, as in therapy, etc.) in a sketchbook which could conceivably be stolen and leaked to the public by a thief.

[Greg Long]

I would imagine not. If the work was private and not for publication the act of libel would not be committed. However if someone else publishes the work, I think they would possibly be liable and would also be liable for prosecution for theft.
Unless an action could prove that the publication was intended by the artist I think any libel action would fail.
I would still seek legal advice though.

[Bringer]

Well, the person in question might alert the authorities for a possible threat to his/her life according to the content of that sketchbook ?
On a side note and speaking quite frankly, I don't think that to "produce unflattering/derogatory imagery of a person" should not serve as therapy.
A smile and friends are great therapies.

[Horsa]

If the sketches, etc, are intended to be private there is no public libel. People write, journal, sketch unflattering things about others in private diaries all the time. I have never heard about such a case leading to legal action.

Should the subject of the sketches find them and feel sufficiently threatened to call the authorities, the authorities will question the artist. If the artist responds that the work is part of a private journal working through past issues and clearly demonstrates that there is no present threat, that should be he end of that.

Art and journaling about past traumas is an accepted and appropriate therapeutic modality in many cases.

In this situation I think the biggest risk of harm might be if the subject saw the works and was upset enough by them to take action (physical, mental, emotional,nor legal) against the artist.

If and when the finished works are published, the "Everyman" test might be applied to determine libel. That is to say, would an ordinary person viewing the works identify the person being depicted as a specific individual. If the subject and those close to him/her was able to detect the pointed reference, but a person unfamiliar with the intimate details of the subject's life would not make the connection between subject and painting the artist is probably safe from libel.