Are those guilty of wild and disgusting allegations re the McCanns aware of the law of criminal libel?

Question

This law can result in people going to jail for spreading libellous comments never mind the other possibility of legal actions.
Shambo beware!

Answer 1

I do get angry when I see people quoting their "freedom of speech", freedom of speech is not inciting hatred or making slanderous allegations about people.
And yes, I think they could take Yahoo to court. Yahoo is ultimately responsible for the content of this site.

Answer 2

Hi Bethany, honey your son's gay whether you like it or not. Being homosexual is not a sin and if you were truly Christian you wouldn't be eating shellfish or wear clothing made from two different types of cloth. You should learn to be more open minded, you don't even know for sure that god even exists and yet you use him as an excuse to be close-minded and kind of stuck up if I'm honest. He has a magazine with naked men in it for gods sake take a hint also he is a 17 year old boy he has a lot of hormones running through him, he's probably also masturbating. As to what you should do about this: Let him know that you know but also you should let him know that it is okay to be homosexual. Boys are 4 times more likely to commit suicide than girls and if you don't accept your son the way he is then you are a horrible person because I'm sure the bible taught you to love your children. Unlike popular belief, you can't choose if you're gay or not, if you don't believe me then consider this: why would anyone choose to be shut out from your family and called a disgrace and be bullied on a daily basis?

Answer 3

Arthur how right you are, I think Dave S is in big trouble, hes had so many accounts deleted its become a joke now. The fact of the matter is, he changed a photograph of the McCann family , Then he went on to post it over the Internet, I work with the police sometimes as a photographer, its fine to photo shop your pics and someone Else's but it is not fine to slap slanderous comments on the t-shirt and advertise it.

Its such a shame that people on here are arguing about this, I hate the name calling and the back stabbing, its like being in an all girls school from the 50's.

DAVID.... do you know what and ISP is...do you know the police can find anyone at anytime in a matter of moments.
I imagine a LOT of people have e-mailed the find Madelaine
web site, Dave s is the instigator and he is bringing the very worst out in people.

Just one last point, all you people that call this "free speech" is not free speech when you are NOT stating actual facts.
As you are all so well educated with the law, do you remember the guy that was on a chat line that threatened suicide, people egged him on, watched him hang himself and all those people were considered a part of it.

so the next time Dave s states the McCanns are paying for air tickets for their family, without having the proof, I suggest he keeps quiet.

By the way Arthur, well said.

Answer 4

It is highly unlikely that anyone in the United States will go to jail for libel against a public figure, particularly if the statement is an opinion.

Reason: The First Amendment of the Constitution grants us the right to criticize our government, among many other matters.

The McCanns would have to sue separately, as individuals, and prove actual malice on the part of each plaintiff.

Having nasty things said about you is the price you pay for being a public figure. Rarely do the public figures bother to sue.

So no, those "guilty" should not allow the threat of criminal libel to silence them in any way.

You might want to educate yourself on the subject.

From the Wikipedia article on "libel laws":

"In the United States, a comprehensive discussion of what is and is not libel or slander is difficult, because the definition differs between different states, and under federal law. Some states codify what constitutes slander and libel together into the same set of laws. Some states have criminal libel laws on the books, though these are old laws which are very infrequently prosecuted.

"Most defendants in defamation lawsuits are newspapers or publishers, which are involved in about twice as many lawsuits as are television stations. Most plaintiffs are corporations, businesspeople, entertainers and other public figures, and people involved in criminal cases, usually defendants or convicts but sometimes victims as well. Almost all states do not allow defamation lawsuits to be filed if the allegedly defamed person is deceased. No state allows the plaintiff to be a group of people.

"In the various states, whether by case law or legislation, there are generally several "privileges" that can get a defamation case dismissed without proceeding to trial. These include the allegedly defamatory statement being one of opinion rather than fact; or being "fair comment and criticism", as it is important to society that everyone be able to comment on matters of public interest. The Supreme Court, however, has rejected the opinion privilege outright and has declined to hold that the "fair comment" privilege is a Constitutional imperative."

From the article on "fair comment":

"The defense of "fair comment" in the U.S. since 1964 has largely been replaced by the ruling in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), (U.S. Supreme Court). This case relied on the issue of actual malice, which involves the defendant making a statement known at the time to be false, or which was made with a "reckless disregard" of whether the statement was true or false. If "actual malice" cannot be shown, the defense of "fair comment" is then superseded by the broader protection of the failure by the plaintiff to show "actual malice.""

Answer 5

Yes, totally, but they will never be prosecuted over it as:

- As there is an ongoing police case into Maddy going missing and any evidence in the liable case may affect the police investigation.

- The Mccanns would be forced to answer questions that would make them look bad / they would rather not answer EG 'You are misusing THE FUND' which could only be answered by making their accounts public.

- Where would they start ???? There are so many say so much about them. (Well okay Sambo & Dave S, but they would have to FIND him first!)

- A liable case could make them look bad EG - 'More interested in them selves than finding Maddy'

- They have got more to worry about at the moment.

- People are posting from different countries making it very difficult.

IF anything, they might try and take action against YAHOO itself for 'allowing' these comments to be posted.

Answer 6

Ask yourself, are the allegations so wild and far from the truth? .Don't forget, at the back of all this is the question of the fate of poor Madeline,these two "caring parents" were, to say the least ,negligent.There are a lot of unanswered questions here that they could help to shed light on !

Answer 7

In my eyes the McCanns should be brought before the courts charged with neglect for allowing their child to be snatched form her sleep
It makes me sick to read how some people on here seem to forget that had the McCanns had not gone out for that meal with their friends that night their daughter would still be with then. Sad as it may be for them I feel they should be brought before the law courts and be held accountable for their neglect

Answer 8

People on Y!A are entitled to their opinions and the McCanns were not suppose to neglected their three children and they did and so far got away with it. Where is the justice in that??????????

Answer 9

I agree with princegallahead
They have to prove its libellous. Then they would have to answer a lot of questions, and they wont want to do that.

Answer 10

I personally don't think they had anything to do with it but doubt they have enough money to pursue everyone all around the world who has their own opinion.