Can People Who Doubt the McCanns Safely Debate on This Forum ?

[faithlilly]

Seems the UK Justice forum has been asked by someone, I assume connected to the McCanns, to report any tweets on #mccann that 'abuse' the McCanns. How safe therefore are our details and what we write here ?

[faithlilly]

I should think you are quite safe as long as you don't defame innocent people - are you able to post without doing so?

Tell me, are admin here experts on defamation law or are they just going to report things willy nilly on the off chance it may be libellous ?

[Puffin]

Oh, for heaven's sake!  As Martha says, you don't defame, you post, discuss, even argue a bit, that's normal, lying and distorting is not.   

[C.Edwards]

 One person's defamation is another person's legitimate comment or question.

I don't believe the McCanns are telling either the full story of what happened or that the details they are revealing are all true.  I have no doubt whatsoever that many of you will splutter with indignation about that simple statement I've made.  If you think it's defamatory or libellous, you need your heads seeing to.

[gilet]

I should think you are quite safe as long as you don't defame innocent people - are you able to post without doing so?

Tell me, are admin here experts on defamation law or are they just going to report things willy nilly on the off chance it may be libellous ?

If a person backs up a claim with evidence for that claim then it is probably not libellous.

The problem comes when people make claims (in this case, about the McCanns) without posting any evidence to back up those claims. Those claims could be potential libel and if in the considered opinion (I very much doubt any report would simply be willy nilly as you claim.) of moderators they appear to be so, reported as such.  It would be up to others then to determine whether it is actual libel.

There are occasions where the claims made are clearly untrue and are actually contradicted by evidence which is easily available. Those could be reported as probable libel.

Personally, as I have no intention of libeling anyone and at all times endeavour only to post evidenced claims and I won't be abusing anyone on the forum then I won't be worrying at all.

I suspect people would only worry if they thought that what they were doing was likely to be considered abusive. 

I know that there are many people on Twitter, for example, who post abusively there because they think it is unregulated and they find the thrill of being abusive quite intoxicating. Thankfully, I don't find I need that kind of thrill. I find life is perfectly satisfying without having to be so offensive. 

Personally, when I see abuse happening I don't turn a blind eye. I do whatever I can to ensure that it stops. I think that is the decent thing to do. Those who either abuse others or even those who simply condone such abuse (for example, by criticising others who report their concerns) are in my view beneath contempt.

[faithlilly]

Oh, for heaven's sake!  As Martha says, you don't defame, you post, discuss, even argue a bit, that's normal, lying and distorting is not.

Seems admin thinks that some of the waiters employed by the OC were lying and distorting the truth with malicious intent so what hope that we get a fair hearing ?

[faithlilly]

@ gilet

Of course you do mean the abuse from both sides of the divide, don't you ?

[Puffin]

Oh, for heaven's sake!  As Martha says, you don't defame, you post, discuss, even argue a bit, that's normal, lying and distorting is not.

Seems admin thinks that some of the waiters employed by the OC were lying and distorting the truth with malicious intent so what hope that we get a fair hearing ?

If you feel that you may end up in trouble, why not just close your membership and go elsewhere?   Or continue posting but making sure you can supply cast iron proof of what you are claiming. 

[gilet]

One person's defamation is another person's legitimate comment or question.

I don't believe the McCanns are telling either the full story of what happened or that the details they are revealing are all true.  I have no doubt whatsoever that many of you will splutter with indignation about that simple statement I've made.  If you think it's defamatory or libellous, you need your heads seeing to.

The part of your post which I have highlighted is simply ridiculous. Do you not understand that defamation is a serious offence?

Legitimate comment is not the same (as you rather ridiculously claim) the same as defamation. The former is legal, the latter a crime.

Abuse of others is also not legitimate comment. It is offensive behaviour at the lowest level and a crime in some circumstances.

That you prefer to post such silliness in defence of the indefensible tells us more about you than about anything else.  That you criticise those who are prepared to report what they believe is abuse rather than the potential abusers is very revealing.

For example, I believe it is correct and legitimate to call the videos from Hideho which have been shown to contain inaccuracies as abusive to the McCanns. Hideho has chosen to claim pride in the lies and distortions she has posted in them. And she has run away from providing any defence for the claims she has made there.

If someone was to report her lies to the authorities I wonder would you criticise that person rather than the liar, Hideho herself?  In any civilised society it is incumbent on citizens to report what they believe is wrongdoing, don't you think so?

 

[gilet]

@ gilet

Of course you do mean the abuse from both sides of the divide, don't you ?

In relation to this thread I mean specifically serious abuse towards the McCanns. I don't condone the "willy nilly" reporting of minor things about anyone.

If you can provide any evidence of any serious abuse towards anyone else then please open a new thread and we can discuss it there without distracting from the point of your own thread here.

The reality is that there are some people (yourself included) who are deliberately closing your eyes to the fact that here and on Twitter there is serious abuse directed at the McCanns. By ignoring that abuse you are telling us a great deal about your underlying motives.

[faithlilly]

@ gilet

So do you believe asking legitimate questions based on the evidence in the files and drawing conclusions from that evidence is 'abuse' ?

[faithlilly]

I think that claiming the McCanns and their friends have fabricated their statements in order to cover-up the crime of hiding a body is defamation.  "Asking questions" about the McCanns and their friends (with the clear implication being that you think they are hiding something), publicly on the internet where everyone can read the questions, and repeatedly over a period of months and years amounts to an abusive and prolonged campaign of defamation in my book..

Can I assume then Martha you are not an expert on defamation law either ?

[gilet]

@ gilet

So do you believe asking legitimate questions based on the evidence in the files and drawing conclusions from that evidence is 'abuse' ?

No, I do not.

But I do believe that posting lies is abuse. I do believe that posting questions in a way in which wrongdoing is clearly insinuated is abuse (it can constitute the crime of libel to do that). I do believe that posting specific denigratory claims about people unsupported by evidence is abuse. I do believe that picking and choosing evidence to suit an agenda is abusive. I do believe that leaving lies online when they have been proven to be such is abusive.

If you are unable to accept that such abuse is frequently posted in various places about the McCanns then you really need to read more widely.

As for people posting legitimate (non libelous) questions then there is (returning to the specific topic of the thread) no reason to worry about being reported and therefore no need to worry about posting on this forum.

I repeat, only those who are posting such abuse need worry.

[ferryman]

I think that claiming the McCanns and their friends have fabricated their statements in order to cover-up the crime of hiding a body is defamation.  "Asking questions" about the McCanns and their friends (with the clear implication being that you think they are hiding something), publicly on the internet where everyone can read the questions, and repeatedly over a period of months and years amounts to an abusive and prolonged campaign of defamation in my book..

Can I assume then Martha you are not an expert on defamation law either ?

Make whatever assumptions you like.

Certainly by English law, Martha is bang on right in every last detail

[gilet]

I think that claiming the McCanns and their friends have fabricated their statements in order to cover-up the crime of hiding a body is defamation.  "Asking questions" about the McCanns and their friends (with the clear implication being that you think they are hiding something), publicly on the internet where everyone can read the questions, and repeatedly over a period of months and years amounts to an abusive and prolonged campaign of defamation in my book..

Can I assume then Martha you are not an expert on defamation law either ?

Your point, Faithlilly, is ridiculous and in my opinion makes you look very foolish indeed.

No-one needs to be an expert in any law to report a potential crime.

If I observe a person hitting another person in the street and I call the police I won't be criticised for not being an expert on section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act of 1988 or the Offences against the Person Act of 1861 etc. I will be seen to be doing my duty.

If I observe a person I believe to be undertaking a burglary in a neighbour's property I won't be criticised for not being familiar with Section 9 of the Theft Act. I will be seen to be doing a civic duty.

In exactly the same way any person who sees what they believe is illegal abuse (online or otherwise) and reports what they consider to be abuse of another person is doing their civic duty.

It is up to the authorities to whom the report was made to determine whether the action is illegal or not.

Can I assume that you would not report a burglary that was happening, or an assault because you are not an expert in the relevant laws? Or would you simply do your civic duty?