Should UK Libel Law be used against the anti Mc Cann clique?

Question

Everyone using the internet can be traced and judging by the content and invented accusations in Yahoo Answers against the Mc Cann family it appears to me that Libel action is justified.

People are traced first through the ISP and then the ISP can be forced by the Police to reveal who is paying for a particular account. The address can also be demanded from the credit card company.

Here is an outline of the Law but see the link below.


There are two versions of defamation, libel and slander. Libel is when the defamation is written down (including email, bulletin boards and websites), and slander is when the incident relates to words spoken.

In the UK, if someone thinks that what you wrote about them is either defamatory or damaging, the onus will be entirely on you to prove that your comments are true in court. In other words, if you make the claim, you've got to prove it!


http://www.urban75.com/Action/libel.html

wrong Lori, A UK man was arrested and will be deported to the USA for computer hacking, there are libel actions often from internet comment.. I reccomend you read some of the questions if you are unsure, some of them are clear Libel and one canot hide behind the internet any more

vivalvegas1. I am against mass immigration but not on a racist or individual basis. I take the same line as migrationwatch whose lawyers make sure no law is broken. I never criticise an individual on the internet because of UK Libel laws

derbyandrew, Thanks for your comment. There is a Libel case as all of the excuses in this question now show.An accusation of kidnapping or money making is clear Libel

vivalvegas1. when I said clique of course I mean individual members of the clique. Thise who accuse the McCanns of kidnapping. holidaymaking, or moneymaking, or of not "appearing to care" and other sick comments

Acimadeseu Tabloid comments have some immunity due to tradition, but I bet any tabloid would not publish some of the sicko comments in Yahoo Answers
as an approved headline or even in the comments section.

LYN W. There is nothing "moot" about the Libelous "Kidnapping" and "free holiday" "money making " sicko comments. They are clear not moot and libelous as solicitors may soon show

S J --- Major point, Libel cases are the fastest growing litigation cases. see this link.
http://www.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=121317&d=122&h=24&f=46

S J it does not need to be the police to start the case a lawyer can gain access to the perpetrator of a libellous statement made on the internet

Answer 1

I think you make a very good point. Everyone is entitled to an opinion but there has been way too may defamatory comments about the McCanns on here.

Problem with Yahoo is too many sheep on here - someone starts McCann bashing then bahhhh, every one else jumps on the bandwagon.

Maybe when all this is over they will instruct their Lawyers.....

Answer 2

Hi,

A very interesting question.

I think the wording in the criticisms need to be analysed.

For example if someone says "they were wrong to leave the children unattended and they should be prosecuted for it." this is not libelous because it is a known true fact that the children were left alone in a locked building, the latter part of the statement is a resulting legal opinion, not a statement of of alleged facts.

The issues of alleged conspiracies on the part of the parents might be libelous provided they can show some damage or loss and are treated differently or spurned by others as a direct result of that statement.

This would be difficult to prove in the light of the true statements that have been made with regards to leaving the children in the first place.

A good debateable question though and the point you are making is a moot point.

Answer 3

I think attention should be focused on finding little Madeline. People have a right to express their opinion. However, if the blatantly make accusations, that is where is gets fuzzy. You have to look at libel laws. They are difficult, at best, to prove, same with slander.

Example: Read any of the tabloids. Lawyers would be pretty busy if everything derogatory that was said by someone went into suit.

As I said, the attention needs to be focused on finding Madeline first and foremost, everything else is secondary.

EDIT: Piltdown Man: I do not know of what comments you speak of. You say libel, yet do not give us any libelous statements to judge for ourselves. So it is kind of difficult to form an opinion of what was said either way, if we don't know what was said that disturbed you so.

Answer 4

So you wish to suppress Free Speech?
Whats this a Threat, so that people stop voicing opinions that you don't agree with?
Or do you find some of the questions asked about the Mccann's too uncomfortable?
With regard to prosecution, that i am afraid would probably involve more than half the country, not a likely scenario is it.
I haven't even considered those from other Nations who also have concerns about issues surrounding this case.

Answer 5

You do know that we do have Free speech and free expression in this country!. if you try to censor this imperative then you are on a slippery slope to nowhere fast!. If people think bad of the Mc Canns then so what!.

Perhaps other parents who see and hear whats going on will think twice about leaving very young kids alone.. And if that's the case then harsh words will have perhaps saved other kids / parents from the same fate as the Mc Canns..

Answer 6

There have been quite a few suggestions that the parents sold their daughter or killed her or are responsible for her disappearance.
This is way beyond the facts. There are many other suggestions regarding the money, publicity seeking, etc.
You cannot just voice "opinions" when you are actually damaging someone's reputation.
And yes, I wonder too if it is time to call a halt, like Gina Ford did, when much less vitriol was aimed at her.

Answer 7

Libel would have to be an inherently false statement. If people are printing their opinions, it would be next to impossible to prove inherent intent to promote a falsehood or even malice. As long as they feel what they are printing is the truth or their true feelings, I don't think ANY libel statute would apply. Also, historically, the internet has been immune from such claims against individuals.
*****
Computer hacking IS a crime. It's not libel. People CAN sue for any reason...they just don't win. I'm quite clear, thank you for your concern.

Answer 8

No, But i did try and many times to eat soup with a spoon, especially if a soup is thick (you can thicken the soup effectively by adding some flour). It takes more time, so I enjoy it longer

Answer 9

Minor point - libel is a civil offence and the police wouldn't touch it with a bargepole.

Answer 10

I suppose it could, but as I am sure you aware they would have to press the issue....

and it appears they have FAR too much on their plate at the moment to bother with that!