More than a year after the case by a former Mitchell baseball player was filed, a judge has ruled that statements made by the American Legion and circulated by the Mitchell Republic and KELO-TV do not constitute defamation.
A South Dakota judge has ruled in favor of the American Legion and two media companies in a defamation lawsuit filed by a former Mitchell baseball player.
Nexstar Media Group, which owns KELO-TV, and Forum Communications, which owns the Mitchell Republic, were defendants in the case revolving around a sentence in a letter by a representative from the American Legion sent to members of the Mitchell Baseball Association.
In November 2024, American Legion adjutant C.P. Van Delist sent the letter to members of the Mitchell Baseball Association saying that Mitchell Baseball would be immediately barred from participating in the American Legion after a rape case involving six players made its way through court.
“It’s always a good feeling when journalism and investigative reporting wins. This shows our community that our newspaper cares about the truth and isn’t afraid of telling it, no matter who is involved or what the story is about.” – Mitchell Republic editor Luke Hagen
In July 2025, Peyton Mandel, one of the six players involved in the case, filed a civil lawsuit saying that Van Delist made "false, malicious, and defamatory" statements about him. Besides the American Legion, Nexstar and Forum were also named in the lawsuit.
Both news organizations published stories containing Van Delist's letter, which named all six players involved in the case and said, "All of these individuals are guilty of accessory to a felony, acknowledging by affirmation of their guilty pleas, that the felonies they were charged with, rape and aiding and abetting, did take place."
Mandel was a player for the Mitchell Baseball team and one of six involved in a hazing incident that took place in 2023 at a Rapid City hotel room. The event, in which another player said the boys held him down and performed forcible digital anal penetration on him, was later characterized as a rape case. He pled guilty in 2024 to one count of accessory to a felony as part of a plea deal.
Get free, fact-based South Dakota news and information in a weekday email. No spam. Cancel any time.
Circuit Judge David Knoff heard the defamation case in May and took it under advisement. The court published its decision Friday, which granted summary judgment to the defendants, which ends the case instead of taking it to trial.
“The statement made by Van Delist and published by the Media Defendants were
substantially true. Mandel (sic) pled guilty to being an accessory to a felony. He never used the word ‘rape’, but the actual act is undisputed and was acquiesced to by his silence at sentencing,” the judge wrote in Friday's ruling.
Mitchell Republic editor Luke Hagen said the ruling was a relief.
“It’s always a good feeling when journalism and investigative reporting wins,” he said. “This shows our community that our newspaper cares about the truth and isn’t afraid of telling it, no matter who is involved or what the story is about.”
Case defines defamation, truth defense
Mandel's lawyer, Tucker Volesky, said during the hearing in May that the contested sentence in the letter indicated Mandel was a rapist when that was not the charge that Mandel pled guilty to. Volesky said that because Mandel pleaded guilty to accessory to a felony, it was wrong to name him in the letter next to the statement of rape taking place.
The lawsuit stated that Van Delist's statements and the subsequent news articles "falsely (represented) and (characterized) Plaintiff as an admitted rapist." The lawsuit also says that Mandel was "denied reapplication for an employment or experiential opportunity in the medical field" as a result of the articles published by KELO and the Mitchell Republic.
Truth is considered an "absolute defense" in defamation cases, which means that if a statement is undeniably true, then it cannot legally be considered defamation. The court's ruling said that prior court cases involving Mandel and the other players established the "factual basis" for this case, and the statement made in Van Delist's letter was true.
"Mandel (sic) relies on a vague admission and the argument that he technically did not admit in court to an accessory to rape or aiding and abetting rape. The Letter is at a minimum substantially true," the ruling said. "While our Constitution doesn't explicitly address minor inaccuracies in publications, South Dakota courts have recognized that minor errors don't necessarily defeat a truth defense when the real substance of the publication remains accurate."
South Dakota News Watch is an independent nonprofit. Read, subscribe for free and donate at sdnewswatch.org. Contact reporter/Report for America corps member Molly Wetsch: 605-531-7382/molly.wetsch@sdnewswatch.org.
