News2 mins ago
defamation of character
If a person (A) tells person (B) that he has done something illegal and person (B) after a short period of time accuses him of doing said illegal activity can person (A) take legal action against person (B) i:e sue person (B)
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by bob57. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Truth is a defence in defamation.
To sue for defamation is hugely expensive and pointless unless:
a) the person being sued has lots and lots of money to pay compensation
and
b) this person has told lies to at least one other person
and
c) that has resulted in some sort of loss, such as loss of business.
For example, if I lied and said Vinnie Jones swore at me, his reputation would not be damaged in any way - he is known to be a 'hard man'.
If I said the local vicar swore at me, then that could damage his reputation.
To sue for defamation is hugely expensive and pointless unless:
a) the person being sued has lots and lots of money to pay compensation
and
b) this person has told lies to at least one other person
and
c) that has resulted in some sort of loss, such as loss of business.
For example, if I lied and said Vinnie Jones swore at me, his reputation would not be damaged in any way - he is known to be a 'hard man'.
If I said the local vicar swore at me, then that could damage his reputation.
Hi, Doc.
Doesn't person B have reasonable cause to believe it is true ...
... ie, it was person A who told him in the first place?
It sounds like all person B may have done is failed to keep a secret, or been a bit indiscreet ... neither of which are actionable.
Person A should have kept his/her mouth shut.
Doesn't person B have reasonable cause to believe it is true ...
... ie, it was person A who told him in the first place?
It sounds like all person B may have done is failed to keep a secret, or been a bit indiscreet ... neither of which are actionable.
Person A should have kept his/her mouth shut.
Jayne is right. The statement has been made by the potential claimant to another who has merely recited the same , or similar, statement back to him.There's been no statement to a third party.
(A) would be in great difficulty even if (B) did tell the world.He'd be the author of his own misfortune.Bit difficult to argue that (B) has lowered (A) in the estimation of right thinking people when (A) has done it himself! Just a bit inequitable to blame (B) ! And, of course, it would be hard to argue that the statement wasn't true.Any statement against interest is normally presumed to be true. And, if it isn't true, then (A) is a liar who has run the risk of his own lie about himself being repeated elsewhere.
(A) would be in great difficulty even if (B) did tell the world.He'd be the author of his own misfortune.Bit difficult to argue that (B) has lowered (A) in the estimation of right thinking people when (A) has done it himself! Just a bit inequitable to blame (B) ! And, of course, it would be hard to argue that the statement wasn't true.Any statement against interest is normally presumed to be true. And, if it isn't true, then (A) is a liar who has run the risk of his own lie about himself being repeated elsewhere.
Doesnt it need to be between people who actually know the defaned person?
I thought , but correct me if i misread.
That online , to defame someone then the defamation about for example jayne by , perhaps me , saying she was maybe an evening escort girl who received cash for certain activities from men .well if i post that here its not defamation.but if i wasto say it to her friends or family or perhaps neighbours.then it would be.
if im wrong telll me now as my heads buzzing from this,.
( btw this of course is hypothetical.as i met jayne the escort .and she dont charge : 0)
well not for extras. )
I thought , but correct me if i misread.
That online , to defame someone then the defamation about for example jayne by , perhaps me , saying she was maybe an evening escort girl who received cash for certain activities from men .well if i post that here its not defamation.but if i wasto say it to her friends or family or perhaps neighbours.then it would be.
if im wrong telll me now as my heads buzzing from this,.
( btw this of course is hypothetical.as i met jayne the escort .and she dont charge : 0)
well not for extras. )
ah jayne
in print yes
but online im saying
apparently theres a difference between online and in print
there have been very few cases where folk have won defamation online cases
and i think one was fro 20 grand from a website that let someone post about a guy being a nazi etc and his friends and family used the site
and knew that SILLY BILL was in reality their friend and therefore the defamation had been made
did i explain that right ?
in print yes
but online im saying
apparently theres a difference between online and in print
there have been very few cases where folk have won defamation online cases
and i think one was fro 20 grand from a website that let someone post about a guy being a nazi etc and his friends and family used the site
and knew that SILLY BILL was in reality their friend and therefore the defamation had been made
did i explain that right ?
http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/ idUSPAR35799720080403
hats what i meant sara
but this guy won LIBEL
for online stuff to people he knew
that spilt over into real life
hats what i meant sara
but this guy won LIBEL
for online stuff to people he knew
that spilt over into real life
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/t ech_and_web/article4389538.ece
didnt know that if someone creates a fake facebook site about yu.
you could potentially get 15 grand ?
well thats interesting isnt it : 0)
didnt know that if someone creates a fake facebook site about yu.
you could potentially get 15 grand ?
well thats interesting isnt it : 0)
