May 28, 2014

Guilty Until Proven Innocent: The Tort of Defamation
Defamation laws are an historical relic of the age of nobility and reflect an exact inversion of the core tenet of western jurisprudence, that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. They retain their historical roots by remaining almost exclusively the tool of the rich and powerful to squelch criticism by the poor and powerless.


Christopher Marlowe said...

He's not going by US law. When a newspaper is accused of defamation of a public figure, the plaintiff must prove malice. This means that it must be shown that the paper KNEW the item was false when it was printed. If the paper is notified of a false claim, then they can relieve their guilt by printing a retraction. Also, US law does not presume damages except in certain circumstances (crime history, loathsome disease, business incompetence, sexual promiscuity/impotence).

Also Truth is a defense. If you can prove what you said is true, then you have nothing to worry about. (The exception is the public disclosure of a private fact, but the persons protected by this tort are not public figures.)

Fag England and Homo Canada's laws are different.

dresdensurvivor said...

"Also Truth is a defense......"
The exception is the Holohoax were truth is no defense!!!