## Facts

- Albert DeSalvo, a Massachusetts prisoner associated publicly with the “Boston Strangler,” had been found incompetent to stand trial on unrelated non-capital charges and was committed to a state hospital; psychiatrists diagnosed schizophrenia but disagreed about his capacity to handle business affairs.
- DeSalvo retained attorney F. Lee Bailey, in part to assess whether DeSalvo’s life story could be sold.
- In 1966, with Bailey’s assistance, DeSalvo entered an agreement conveying rights to his life story and name to author Gerold Frank.
- Frank authored a book portraying DeSalvo as the Boston Strangler and later sold motion-picture rights to Twentieth Century-Fox.
- Fox produced and planned to distribute the film *The Boston Strangler*, depicting DeSalvo as the Boston Strangler; a theater-chain distributor intervened due to an upcoming engagement.
- DeSalvo sued seeking to stop release/exhibition and to recover damages, alleging defamation and invasion of privacy, and contending he had not validly consented due to mental incapacity and alleged attorney misconduct.
- At trial, DeSalvo did not prove that the film’s portrayal of him as the Boston Strangler was false.

## Issues

1. Whether DeSalvo lacked contractual capacity to convey life-story and name rights, or whether the agreement was voidable due to alleged attorney misconduct.
2. Whether portraying DeSalvo as the Boston Strangler constituted actionable defamation, including whether DeSalvo proved falsity and lack of consent.
3. Whether the film’s commercial use of DeSalvo’s name and life story constituted an invasion of privacy/appropriation despite the life-story agreement.
4. Whether permanent injunctive relief barring release/exhibition (and damages) was available on these facts.

## Decision

- Judgment entered for Twentieth Century-Fox and the intervening distributor; no permanent injunction and no damages.
- The life-story agreement was valid; DeSalvo had sufficient capacity and knowingly and voluntarily transferred the relevant rights.
- The defamation claim failed because DeSalvo did not prove falsity of the challenged portrayal and because the agreement supplied consent for the depiction.
- Privacy/appropriation claims were barred by DeSalvo’s express transfer of rights authorizing exploitation of his name and life story.

## Legal Principles

- Incompetence to stand trial does not automatically establish civil incapacity to contract; capacity turns on whether the person understood the nature and consequences of the transaction at the time of contracting.
- A plaintiff asserting defamation based on an allegedly false portrayal bears the burden to prove falsity; failure of proof defeats the claim.
- Voluntary transfer of life-story and name rights operates as consent to expressive and commercial uses within the scope of the grant, barring or limiting later defamation and privacy/appropriation claims.
- Courts are disinclined to restrain distribution of expressive works absent a valid underlying claim supporting injunctive relief.

## Conclusion

The court upheld DeSalvo’s life-story contract and held that his failure to prove falsity and his contractual consent defeated his defamation and privacy theories, leaving no basis to enjoin or impose liability for release and exhibition of the film.


DeSalvo v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 300 F. Supp. 742 (D. Mass. 1969)