Libel?? Really??
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Latest News and Debate :: Debate Section - for purporting theories
Page 1 of 1 • Share
Libel?? Really??
How can the McCann's sue ANYONE for libel/defamation ?? If this case has never gone to trial and they have never been proven innocent, beyond any reasonable doubt, then how can they say for sure that anyone is uttering false statements damaging their reputation, unless it has been proven otherwise??
How can the courts allow this to happen in the first place, surely this just contradicts the act of libelling, as in, first of all you must be sure the person claiming that someone is bringing their good name into disrepute is in fact WRONG............only one side can realistically be telling the truth.
It's obvious I know doodly-squat about libel laws, so if anyone can shed any light then please do...........
THANKS!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
How can the courts allow this to happen in the first place, surely this just contradicts the act of libelling, as in, first of all you must be sure the person claiming that someone is bringing their good name into disrepute is in fact WRONG............only one side can realistically be telling the truth.
It's obvious I know doodly-squat about libel laws, so if anyone can shed any light then please do...........
THANKS!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
____________________
Grammatical Error of The Day : It's should 'have', NOT should 'of'...... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Upsy Daisy- Posts : 437
Activity : 469
Likes received : 7
Join date : 2011-04-11
Re: Libel?? Really??
Other way round in libel. You start as guilty having to prove what you wrote was correct. More to it, but that's the gist.Upsy Daisy wrote:How can the McCann's sue ANYONE for libel/defamation ?? If this case has never gone to trial and they have never been proven innocent, beyond any reasonable doubt, then how can they say for sure that anyone is uttering false statements damaging their reputation, unless it has been proven otherwise??
How can the courts allow this to happen in the first place, surely this just contradicts the act of libelling, as in, first of all you must be sure the person claiming that someone is bringing their good name into disrepute is in fact WRONG............only one side can realistically be telling the truth.
It's obvious I know doodly-squat about libel laws, so if anyone can shed any light then please do...........
THANKS!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Spaniel- Posts : 742
Activity : 769
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2012-01-24
Re: Libel?? Really??
right, so the Mcscams do have the upper hand then, since they can say everyone is wrong about them and nobody can point blank prove they are telling the truth. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
____________________
Grammatical Error of The Day : It's should 'have', NOT should 'of'...... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Upsy Daisy- Posts : 437
Activity : 469
Likes received : 7
Join date : 2011-04-11
Similar topics
» McCanns oppose proposed libel reforms - with the SUPPORT of the Libel Reform Campaign!
» The libel survivor - what it's like to be faced with a gruelling libel claim
» LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE
» LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE
» Libel v Criminal
» The libel survivor - what it's like to be faced with a gruelling libel claim
» LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE
» LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE
» Libel v Criminal
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Latest News and Debate :: Debate Section - for purporting theories
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum