Fan Wants To Take Nick Kyrgios To Court For Defamation

[perseverer]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/62644396

So instead of a handful of people who knew who she was, it will now be millions?

[naomi24]

Unlike you, AH, I don't necessarily believe all I read - or what it suits me to believe. I read the thread - including the post from ellipsis.

[davebro]

So she made such an ass of herself that the player thought (and said) she must be drunk. Only got herself to blame!

I don't think you can be found guilty of slander if you believed what you said to be true at the time (I could be wrong).

[naomi24]

sqad, yes, the thing about her looking drunk. Maybe she did. Who knows? She was certainly ejected.

[aelmpvw]

her boorish behaviour was inexcusable if she was sober :-)

[davebro]

and if she wasn't!

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - // Unlike you, AH, I don't necessarily believe all I read - or what it suits me to believe. //

There will be a short pause while any reader digests the simple fact that you have no idea what I believe, or not, or for what reasons.

// I read the thread - including the post from ellipsis. //

Then I can only assume you failed to understand it.

And with regard to your observation that, quote, "I don't necessarily believe all I read - or what it suits me to believe."

That is clearly untrue.

Since I doubt you are personally acquainted with Virginia Guiffre, you can only presume her financial status based on what you have read in the media, which you have chosen to believe, because it suits you to believe it.

You can't have it both ways.

[andy-hughes]

davebro - // So she made such an ass of herself that the player thought (and said) she must be drunk. Only got herself to blame! //

I can only repeat my earlier point - crowd misbehaviour is addressed by the umpire, and he or she can then direct the stewards to remove an individual, if his or her request to behave is not met.

For a player to abuse a spectator without first following protocol without her having a chance to quieten down when requested by the umpire, resulting in her ejection, is unacceptable.

// I don't think you can be found guilty of slander if you believed what you said to be true at the time (I could be wrong). //

We shall see if the case gets to court.

[ladybirder]

Kyrgios did complain to the umpire and pointed the woman out to him. Talking when someone is serving is just not on. She says she was doing it to support him. Hmmm! If I had been in charge she wouldn't have been allowed back in again.

I know K can be a PITA but he was right here.

[davebro]

//I can only repeat my earlier point - crowd misbehaviour is addressed by the umpire, and he or she can then direct the stewards to remove an individual, if his or her request to behave is not met.//

The umpire hasn't got eyes in the back of his head - his main focus is and should be what is happening on court. I think K was quite in order to point out this woman's misbehaviour.

[Zacs-Master]

'The umpire hasn't got eyes in the back of his head'

No, but if Kyrgios could hear her then the Umpire must have been able to as well.

[JJ109]

Whether or not she was being a nuisance is irrelevant. If you have a complaint you go up to the umpire and politely request him/her to sort it out and have the spectator ejected, giving your reasons to the umpire. You do not make accusations in public that are not correct "allegedly" otherwise instead of the spectator being in the wrong, the player is .....and correctly so. I have no sympathy!

[naomi24]

The bottom line is she shouldn't have done it. What sort of grown woman behaves like that? Not one whose company I would want to keep.

[JJ109]

To paraphrase Naomi

The bottom line is he shouldn't have done it. What sort of grown man behaves like that? Not one whose company I would want to keep.

[naomi24]

JJ, in his shoes I can't say I wouldn't be a bit miffed. Anyone who does what she did deserves all she gets.

[JJ109]

I understand that Naomi - anybody would be miffed, and if she was ejected I wouldn't have sympathy for her. However, he went about it the wrong way.

[Peter Pedant]

// The bottom line is she shouldn't have done it.//
she done him wrong

of all the many non-sequiturs on this thread - I pick this to
"nothing to do with libel and or slander"

New law - libel act 2013
but under the old law - not a hope
for slandy, you have to show special damage in this case she lost as a direct result of the alleged defamatory phrases

and I cant imagine the 2013 reform makes it easier

Let us forget about Giuffre: she was not complaining what The Randy Prince said to her, but what he DID to her.....

[naomi24]

Perhaps the heat of the moment comes into play at a Wimbledon final, eh? I can't say that in those circumstances I could guarantee I'd have done it by the rules - a result of my failing as a human being I expect.

[Peter Pedant]

no tort known as wrongful miffy

let us get back to botching about what she said

[Peter Pedant]

tort of not being a human being - - nope
god we are collecting the non-torts this afternoon

keep carping boys and gilrs !

[JJ109]

Naomi - I am sure that if it goes to court, there will be mitigating circumstances, and she will have to prove her case. Obviously, both were in the wrong, and it will be down to the court to determine the outcome, and I don't want to second guess!