Libel? Playing Editor!

Play editor! Read the following draft of a college newspaper story and determine if it contains any passages that are libelous. If you believe you have found a libelous passage, describe the passage and why you believe it is libelous. Then briefly explain what you would need to do to fix it -- or what you would need to omit -- before running the story. (Or would you run it at all?)

Here's the draft to review for libel:

A sophomore at Springfield University claims a chemistry professor has sexually harassed her.

Karen Hart, 123 Hill Hall, says the professor, George O.T. Jungle, has touched her during tutoring sessions in his office and has invited her to his apartment several times. She said she declined his invitations.

"I am having trouble in the class and I have to go see him to get help with my papers and projects," Hart said. "But I am scared to go in his office now."

Jungle denied having an improper contact with the student and threatened this newspaper with a libel suit if it published the story.

Hart said she is thinking of filing a formal complaint with the university.

"I don't know how to do that," she said. "I don't know what to do."


This is perfect, I am currently taking Mass Communications Law, Mcom 101.
So, I’ll give my expert opinion!
First of all, for a statement to be labeled “actionable libel” it MUST be false. So, I cannot be truly sure about whether or not the statements are libelous or not because I do not know if they are true. So, I’ll do my best.
The first sentence is libelous is it is a false statement or if whoever gathered that information from Karen made the news gatherer promise confidentiality--to not repeat or publish what she told him or her.
This is on the verge of libel, but it is not. The writer makes a good move by always including “she said,” in the statements. But still, this is too detailed to release to the public considering she hasn’t even filed a formal complaint.
It is not libelous, but it is stupid to write a story without reasonable proof. Just hearing this news from a student is not enough.
I would omit the parts in the second paragraph about Jungle touching her or inviting her to his apartment. Also, in the fourth paragraph the use of the word “threatened” has a very negative connotation. I would either omit that sentence, or at least not use “threatened.”
The entire piece seems like it was meant to ruin Jungle’s reputation, which is one of the characteristics of a libelous publication.
Overall, this is very libelous, but I am not sure if it would be labeled completely libelous in court. I would have to know more about the truth of the statements Hart and Jungle made.
If I were the editor, I would leave it a short, impersonal article and not name the teacher. However, if Hart told my reporter that she wanted to be named, then I would name her.