True meaning?

[CamperPete]

Libel has to be an untrue statement. ........

It has also been held that if the person making the statement has reasonable cause to believe it to be true (even though it was later found to be false) then it is not defamation/libel.

Oooh, this is getting confusing BUT seeing as we now have a DIY Lawyer forum then......

"Reasonable cause, as opposed to probable cause, is the suspicion that a crime is being committed or is being planned to be committed. It requires a much lower standard than probable cause, which requires evidence of criminal matters. "

Dunno how this fits in but it looks important

 

[JohnD]

Libel is civil not criminal

 

[johnny_t]

Just noticed something from slogger's link that may be important, but obviously I can't tell because I don't know if your situation is hypothetical or not, or if you have a real person in mind or not, however........


For a statement to be defamatory the imputation must tend to lower the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally


........now, if the person doing the imputing was widely held by right-thinking members of society to be a complete and utter idiot, then it is possible that you couldn't be defamed by them ever, because it wouldn't lessen your standing. Don't know though.


What I do remember is that there was definitely one poster who said on several occasions that BAS would be hearing from his solicitors because he had been called racist. Wish I could remember who it was and you could ask them how they got on. Never mind, I'm sure it'll come back to me.........

 

[securespark]

Libel has to be an untrue statement. It cannot be a question.

If I were to say that you were an immigrant and asked if you paid tax - then that isn't libelous.

Neither is it libellous to give an opinion - which is how TV shows like 'Have I got news for you' get around things. Such as "I think Tony Blair is an idiot'.

If you think I've defamed you - then sue me.

Did anybody mention Joe?

No, I thought not. Guilty conscience, perhaps? If not, why else did he relate this post to something he said in another?

Oh, and by the way, Joe.. Didn't you say that posting stuff from a locked post was a "bannable offence"?

 

[JohnD]

I suppose if you called someone an immigrant, and stated that they didn't pay tax, and that was untrue, then it would be libellous since tax evasion is criminal. I am talking about an allegation, not a question.

 

[Linc]

........now, if the person doing the imputing was widely held by right-thinking members of society to be a complete and utter idiot, then it is possible that you couldn't be defamed by them ever, because it wouldn't lessen your standing.....

What about the person about whom someone was writing?

That reminds me of the army Colonel writing an appraisal on one of his junior officers. He wrote. "To retain this man in the Army would be depriving some village of its idiot!"

So I suppose that wouldn't be libel!?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Capital punishment arguments + abuse removed, sorry

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If we can have a sensible discussion about the concept of libel
without finding a way of turning it into an argument on the
merits of capital punishment, this thread will have more
chance of surviving.

If it becomes abusive it will be deleted

Mod Rupert
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Capital punishment arguments + abuse removed, sorry

Actually, it wasn't abuse - it was an explanation of the reasons that I used a term to describe eggplant, that he objects to.

 

[joe-90]

I suppose if you called someone an immigrant, and stated that they didn't pay tax, and that was untrue, then it would be libellous since tax evasion is criminal. I am talking about an allegation, not a question.

What's wrong with calling someone an immigrant if they are an immigrant?

Who mentioned not paying tax. Read what is written - not what you think is written.

 

[JohnD]

I recall "somebody" accusing Wood, as a European immigrant, of contributing nothing.

I asked what evidence there was that she did not pay Income Tax, National Insurance, VAT and Business Rates.

There was no evidence produced for this accusation.

Read what was written, not what you now think ought to have been written.

 

[securespark]

 

[joe-90]

I recall "somebody" accusing Wood, as a European immigrant, of contributing nothing.

I asked what evidence there was that she did not pay Income Tax, National Insurance, VAT and Business Rates.

There was no evidence produced for this accusation.

Read what was written, not what you now think ought to have been written.

Would you like to show me where that was written? (he won't)

 

[JohnD]

The post has now been removed, as I'm sure you know.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

John - you might as well try to nail jelly to the wall as to get Joe to engage in any sensible debate. Just ignore him.

 

[WoodYouLike]

Defamation is an act of libel (or vice-versa, everyone knows what I mean)
What would you call then someone, who in an online discussion losing the plot or the argument, telling a European citizen living and working in the UK - contributing to the English society in more than one way - to go back home where they belong instead of 'being a burden for the pension and national health service in the Uk where they (according to this person) haven't contributed to??

In one way I would call that a childish reaction, on the other hand I would call that abuse. And in worst case that would be a libelous act