On 13 Apr 2007 11:03:07 -0700, leaenna_mills@budweiser.com wrote:
>But isn't the "it wasn't me guv" defence valid? (For valid defence,
>possibly read "loophole in the law that needs updating to encompass
>modern methods of communication").
For libel the defence isn't necessary. It is the claimant who has to
prove stuff.
>If there are, say, 4 people who have access to a pc, it could
>potentially be any one of them who posts abuse, drivel, libel or,
>equally, downloads kiddie-.. How will even the best libel lawyer
>prove who was sat at a pc at the time?
He cannot without a confession or statement as far as libel is
concerned. For KP and criminal stuff it is just ' No Comment' all the
way and absolutely nothing else.
pete
www.suffolkrightsofway.co.uk
www.ipswichwaterfrontaccess.co.uk |