roosterboost Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Can families sue for the libel or slander of a dead person? Not as such. But they can sue for tarnishing the family name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 They can't ride a bike either, but their families can. But they can't testify themselves - savile being the classic case. Everything that he did came out after he died, nobody sued, nobody was frightened by the idea of being sued because savile was dead (apart from the bbc of course) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roosterboost Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 (edited) But they can't testify themselves - savile being the classic case. Everything that he did came out after he died, nobody sued, nobody was frightened by the idea of being sued because savile was dead (apart from the bbc of course) Well that would depend on whether the allegations you made could be backed up. I'm not sure Savile's family are about to take anyone to court. Speakig ill of the dead is fine if the evidence exists. But then speaking ill of the living is fine if you can back it up. You could if you like make up some lurid stories about Deborah Mitford who recently passed away. Of course such tales would impact on the reputation of the Dukes of Devonshire, the Cavendish family and the Chatsworth Estate. They might deem that the estate was damaged by your lies to the tune of a few million, and any solicitor in the land would be happy to take you to court for restitution. I suspect your money would run out before theirs did. So perhaps consult a lawyer before bad mouthing the dead. It might save you consulting one a few months down the line. Edited January 22, 2015 by roosterboost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Well that would depend on whether the allegations you made could be backed up. I'm not sure Savile's family are about to take anyone to court. Speakig ill of the dead is fine if the evidence exists. But then speaking ill of the living is fine if you can back it up. You could if you like make up some lurid stories about Deborah Mitford who recently passed away. Of course such tales would impact on the reputation of the Dukes of Devonshire, the Cavendish family and the Chatsworth Estate. They might deem that the estate was damaged by your lies to the tune of a few million, and any solicitor in the land would be happy to take you to court for restitution. I suspect your money would run out before theirs did. So perhaps consult a lawyer before bad mouthing the dead. It might save you consulting one a few months down the line. Wasn't planning on bad mouthing anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 News broke yesterday that another file was found which was overshadowed by the mass media with the Chilcot saga, perhaps the timing was fortunate, however the Metro published a minor story about the file on page 4 of today's edition. I see Leon Britton will escape justice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 News broke yesterday that another file was found which was overshadowed by the mass media with the Chilcot saga, perhaps the timing was fortunate, however the Metro published a minor story about the file on page 4 of today's edition. I see Leon Britton will escape justice The Times Obituary column no less, began its eulogy with the words 'Leon Brittan, the former Tory home secretary whose reputation had been tarnished by allegations of paedophilia, has died at the age of 75' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrystottle Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Why is everyone believing that the existence of this paedophile ring is an established fact and commenting accordingly? Do factors like evidence and convictions not matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Why is everyone believing that the existence of this paedophile ring is an established fact and commenting accordingly? Do factors like evidence and convictions not matter? Because there are survivors of the dreadful abuse who can testify. Many of them have been called 'credible witnesses' by the police. It is notoriously difficult in cases of sexual abuse, particularly of many years ago, to get evidence. Add in the fact that the perpetrators are members of the establishment & it may be nigh on impossible to secure convictions. Why don't you believe it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrystottle Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 the fact that the perpetrators are members of the establishment & it may be nigh on impossible to secure convictions.? See? It's a fact in your mind. Why don't you believe it? I'm open minded. It may be, it may not be. But I would prefer some evidence rather than a political smear campaign that is long on allegations and very short on facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bloom Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 See? It's a fact in your mind. I'm open minded. It may be, it may not be. But I would prefer some evidence rather than a political smear campaign that is long on allegations and very short on facts. Against all the major parties? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now