Libel Gone mad

[outragous76]

"Why is Lord McAlpine trending. *innocent face*."

Sent as a tweet, how is the above libellous?

Really surprised by the verdict!

[mulhuzz]

absolutely shocking.

disgraceful.

an appeal should be launched immediately.

[tikay]

"Why is Lord McAlpine trending. *innocent face*."

Sent as a tweet, how is the above libellous?

Really surprised by the verdict!

Because it was a clear & deliberate innuendo relating to a matter in which Lord McAlpine had been wrongly accused. He was wholly innocent but the irresponsible side of Social-Media were having a field day.

It was a terrific ruling in my personal opinion, it is bang wrong that people can say what they like on Social-Media without recourse to the normal legal processes.

If you were wearing his shoes, I can't imagine you'd be very happy at what happened.

[tikay]

Ha!

Amazing how such different views can be held.

[outragous76]

"Why is Lord McAlpine trending. *innocent face*."

Sent as a tweet, how is the above libellous?

Really surprised by the verdict!

Because it was a clear & deliberate innuendo relating to a matter in which Lord McAlpine had been wrongly accused. He was wholly innocent but the irresponsible side of Social-Media were having a field day.

It was a terrific ruling in my personal opinion, it is bang wrong that people can say what they like on Social-Media without recourse to the normal legal processes.

If you were wearing his shoes, I can't imagine you'd be very happy at what happened.

She didnt say anything

There has been an interpretation which is very dangerous

If he was trending, she was far from the first, so everyone else prior to her tweet has libelled him too?

Very dangerous ruling IMO

[mulhuzz]

you absolutely cannot infer any damage to Lord McAlpine's reputation from a simple tweet which doesn't make any accusation.

absolutely scandalous decision.

I have no doubt that Lord McAlpine had great cause to be concerned, shocked and annoyed at many things which were being published around that time (specifically: the BBC's Newsnight program) but to say that this specific tweet was libellous is to err in both fact and law.

its an absolute million that this isn't overturned on appeal.

[tikay]

"Why is Lord McAlpine trending. *innocent face*."

Sent as a tweet, how is the above libellous?

Really surprised by the verdict!

Because it was a clear & deliberate innuendo relating to a matter in which Lord McAlpine had been wrongly accused. He was wholly innocent but the irresponsible side of Social-Media were having a field day.

It was a terrific ruling in my personal opinion, it is bang wrong that people can say what they like on Social-Media without recourse to the normal legal processes.

If you were wearing his shoes, I can't imagine you'd be very happy at what happened.

She didnt say anything

There has been an interpretation which is very dangerous

If he was trending, she was far from the first, so everyone else prior to her tweet has libelled him too?

Very dangerous ruling IMO

You KNOW what she was alluding to, & so did she, & everyone else.

The fact that others did not get prosecuted changes nothing.

So if YOU were in his shoes, you'd be fine with all the innuendo & slurs then? Go on, try the obverse test.

[outragous76]

You are wrong thou, not only did I not know at the time, I wouldnt have known if you had shown me the tweet

You are suggesting that we cross a very dangerous line that everyone knows everything and can there infer whatever they like into something and twist it as they see fit to bring a libel action.

Im with MullHuzz, million this doesnt get overturned

[tikay]

You are wrong thou, not only did I not know at the time, I wouldnt have known if you had shown me the tweet

You are suggesting that we cross a very dangerous line that everyone knows everything and can there infer whatever they like into something and twist it as they see fit to bring a libel action.

Im with MullHuzz, million this doesnt get overturned

So you don't want to try the obverse test, & imagine how YOU would feel in his shoes then, you of all people?

Sadly, I don't know what "million this does not get overturned" means, truly.

When you have been maligned on Social-Media, it is, believe me, "not nice". I hope you never have to suffer it.

[TightEnd]

You are wrong thou, not only did I not know at the time, I wouldnt have known if you had shown me the tweet

You are suggesting that we cross a very dangerous line that everyone knows everything and can there infer whatever they like into something and twist it as they see fit to bring a libel action.

Im with MullHuzz, million this doesnt get overturned

At the time of the tweet his name had been wrongly and disgracefully associated with the child abuse scandal in North Wales and this tweet followed about 48hours of constant coverage on news, newspapers and social media

McAlpine's brief said this morning "Only a moron who was very busy would not have known what the tweet was referring to"

The judge agreed

think its a fantastic decision

 while I do think that sometimes that libel laws are used as a sledgehammer to crack a nut it really is about time that aload of people on social media bear this type of ruling in mind when it comes to what they post on twitter and the like

As someone who has been on the receiving end of libellous stuff on social meida, without the resources to do anything about it, I think its a step in the right direction

[mulhuzz]

Tikay, what's amazing is that you can't even be sure *she* knew what she was alluding to, much less knowing that Guy or I knew.

That's the real danger of this decision and is a real backward step for the state of British libel law -- which was improving apace with the introduction of the Defamation Act recently -- although improving apace from what was largely considered the most claimant friendly and litigous system in the world is no great shakes, to be honest.

edit: million this doesn't get overturned suggests that we think it is a one million to one shot (1,000,000/1) that this decision isn't overturned on appeal.

[tikay]

You are wrong thou, not only did I not know at the time, I wouldnt have known if you had shown me the tweet

You are suggesting that we cross a very dangerous line that everyone knows everything and can there infer whatever they like into something and twist it as they see fit to bring a libel action.

Im with MullHuzz, million this doesnt get overturned

At the time of the tweet his name had been wrongly and disgracefully associated with the child abuse scandal in North Wales and this tweet followed about 48hours of constant coverage on news, newspapers and social media

McAlpine's brief said this morning "Only a moron who was very busy would not have known what the tweet was referring to"

The judge agreed

think its a fantastic decision

 while I do think that sometimes that libel laws are used as a sledgehammer to crack a nut it really is about time that aload of people on social media bear this type of ruling in mind when it comes to what they post on twitter and the like

As someone who has been on the receiving end of libellous stuff on social meida, without the resources to do anything about it, I think its a step in the right direction

Both those.

Until you have been on the wrong end of it, it is hard to grasp.

[millidonk]

I was aware of the story and only came to the conclusion that's what she "MIGHT" have meant.

Utterly ridiculous decision, far too much weight put on someone's own interpretation of something.

Tikay, we don't know what she was alluding to. Only she knows for sure.

Things a million times worse and more direct have been said about people, are they going to go back through and have a hearing for them all.

#Farce

[pokerfan]

You are wrong thou, not only did I not know at the time, I wouldnt have known if you had shown me the tweet

You are suggesting that we cross a very dangerous line that everyone knows everything and can there infer whatever they like into something and twist it as they see fit to bring a libel action.

Im with MullHuzz, million this doesnt get overturned

They agreed a settlement.

[tikay]

Tikay, what's amazing is that you can't even be sure *she* knew what she was alluding to, much less knowing that Guy or I knew.

That's the real danger of this decision and is a real backward step for the state of British libel law -- which was improving apace with the introduction of the Defamation Act recently -- although improving apace from what was largely considered the most claimant friendly and litigous system in the world is no great shakes, to be honest.

As the Judge noted, for me NOT to know would be very unlikely.

It is a FACT that she DID know, too. She was point-scoring, & it cost her.