Roger Dewhurst wrote:
>
>>
>> If it is shared then it becomes libel.
>> Of course, what they are relying on is that the burden of proof in a
>> civil court is less than a criminal court. Hence they can argue that
>> despite no criminal conviction it is *likely* that XXX committed the
>> crime and we are only reporting that fact.
>>
>
> You appear to be suggesting that a defence against libel can rest on the
> balance of probability that someone did something "naughty" (for want
> of any suitable comprehensive word). I suspect that you are wrong.
> Actuality may be a defence in a libel case but I very much doubt if
> balance of probability is.
Maybe we will see a new precedent...
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London |