A reminder that you are responsible for what you post on NSC and tweet.

[Lord Bracknell]

" their"

I hate all of you illiterate soft southern shandy drinking blouse wearing poofs

So sue me.

he he

Jeez, Dave, you KNOW I was born in Leeds. I DEMAND an apology.

 

[AmexRuislip]

I would like to make it clear that, despite the opinions of many others that I have heard expressed with great vehemence, I have no evidence whatsoever to confirm whether or not Mr Scott McGleish might be a wanker.

So by calling Joey Barton, an alleged knuckle dragger, would be out of order?

 

[Gwylan]

The first time? How many times have you been sued for libel?

Twice. Neither went to court

The first time, the plaintiff backed down; second time, we did (although our story was actually true, the managing director got cold feet - we'd have won if she'd toughed it out).

There some editors who take the view that if a journalist hasn't been sued for libel at least once, he/she isn't good enough.

Wise words indeed although in this case the fragrant( flagrant shurely ? ) Miss Hopkins was asked to apologize and given a chance to avoid this action but then ramped up her vitriol !

And this is very much taken into account, courts don't like being asked to adjudicate on something that could have been settled.

The court will also take into account any action to mitigate a defamatory article (removal, early apology etc). It may still leave you facing damages but they'll probably be less

 

[El Presidente]

So by calling Joey Barton, an alleged knuckle dragger, would be out of order?

Wouldn't hurt a soul, guv.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/a-brief-history-of-joey-barton-s-football-controversies-1-4234191

 

[AmexRuislip]

Wouldn't hurt a soul, guv.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/a-brief-history-of-joey-barton-s-football-controversies-1-4234191

With a rap sheet like that, it's a wonder why he's still allowed to """"grace""" a footy pitch!

 

[Dave the OAP]

Jeez, Dave, you KNOW I was born in Leeds. I DEMAND an apology.

Furry muff. Sorry my lord.

He he ....

 

[Eeyore]

I removed myself from Twitter a few weeks ago because of my complete inability to censor myself when I've had a drink.

If you've had a few shandys it's best to take yourself to the Argus comments section. You'll be seen as one of the more informed commentators.

 

[Pevenseagull]

AS much as Katie Hopkins was due something like this given her approach to Twitter, Jack Monroe didn't exactly arrive at the High Court like some naive Twitter innocent. She was guilty herself of some pretty disgusting Tweets that were every bit as defamatory and hurtful as Hopkins and was extremely lucky that her target never sued her.

More importantly, if the opportunity arose, I wouldn't want to have sex with either of them.

#internationalwomemsdaywasacoupleofdaysago

 

[Bob'n'weave]

There's been a bit of emotive stuff recently, and in the main NSC is an incredibly good self policing board. Having seen what has happened to the fragrant Katie Hopkins today, who has had to pay damages of £24,000 for two tweets, and legal costs that are likely to be very eye watering, can I remind you splendid ladies and gentlemen to keep it within respectable boundaries.

[Tweet]840203940482437121[/Tweet]

I won't be panicking about pissing anyone off on here, not that I intend to. Twitter is a public space and a large element of 'damage' is accredited to the plaintiff if there is a significant audience. As in Tom Daley, the diver and many other celebs with huge followings. As the judge said - "These are meanings with a defamatory tendency, which were published to thousands."

Calling someone a c***t on NSC will not be pinging up on anyones radar. Besides, the mods here do a good job in keeping things from getting out of hand, or too personal.

*Looks for brown-nosing emoji*.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The £24K damages seems paltry compared to the costs the judge has awarded. £107K.

That's £131K just to insult someone!!

 

[redoubtable seagull]

The £24K damages seems paltry compared to the costs the judge has awarded. £107K.

That's £131K just to insult someone!!

£65.5K per tweet! Ouch.

 

[fataddick]

The 107k costs is what Hopkins has to pay inmediately. The remainder will be due once all costs have been calculated. Monroe's lawyers have already said the final total will be over 300k. That's just Monroe's costs - Hopkins' own costs will presumably be similar. Overall cost (damages plus both sets of costs) to Hopkins of that tweet will likely be between 500k and 800k, ie around 25% of her total (2.75m) net worth. It's worth noting that Monroe was willing to settle out of court for 5k and an apology but Hopkins turned it down like the idiot she is. PS why are people using 'she' and 'her' when referring to Monroe? Jack is non-binary transgender and the personal pronoun 'they'/'their' is the correct one to use.

 

[Swillis]

PS why are people using 'she' and 'her' when referring to Monroe? Jack is non-binary transgender and the personal pronoun 'they'/'their' is the correct one to use.

FFS, she's a woman. Non binary transgender, what a load of bollocks!

 

[maltaseagull]

This is good advice. Can you help further with some (hypothetical) examples relevant to NSC that are "emotive" and would also approach the line that Katie Hopkins crossed...?

"Defamatory" is the key, isn't it? How does that get defined and used in theory and in practice?

Some of the political discussions may need to be reviewed.
some very dodgy insults from the left wingers.

 

[vegster]

Is it ok to say that Theresa May is a duplicitous, brainless and soulless automaton ? just checking like,

 

[Theatre of Trees]

The £24K damages seems paltry compared to the costs the judge has awarded. £107K.

That's £131K just to insult someone!!

What is more Hopkins actually intended to insult somebody else. The costs are the price of her ego refusing to contemplate she was wrong.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

AS much as Katie Hopkins was due something like this given her approach to Twitter, Jack Monroe didn't exactly arrive at the High Court like some naive Twitter innocent. She was guilty herself of some pretty disgusting Tweets that were every bit as defamatory and hurtful as Hopkins and was extremely lucky that her target never sued her.

So let Monroe's 'victims' sue. (Why haven't they?) Personally I had a good laugh that Hopkin's nasty bullying shite has cost her over £100K. The judge told her not to publish 'fake news' . . . . I nearly crashed the car, laughing, when I heard that, on R5, on he way to the game this afternoon. 'Alternative facts' schurely, m'lud?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Some of the political discussions may need to be reviewed.
some very dodgy insults from the left wingers.

Really? Is loony a left winger?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

FFS, she's a woman. Non binary transgender, what a load of bollocks!

Move with the times. We are what we want to be.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

JC? Do you mean our lord and saviour Jesus Christ?

He's a regular on NSC, just has a different username.

Not that different