Dawkins sued for libel

A forum to talk about other sites and things you've found in the jungle that is the internet.

Please take a moment to read the rationalia guidelines: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3449
Post Reply
Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by Seth » Mon Nov 07, 2011 6:07 pm

vjohn82 wrote:4373 posts since Jan 2011.

Says it all.
Sixty-two posts since Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:08 am

Says fuck-all about anything, either one.

:airwank:
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

vjohn82
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:08 am
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by vjohn82 » Mon Nov 07, 2011 6:16 pm

Yes, responding to your shite... I won't change your mind so now I won't bother.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by Seth » Mon Nov 07, 2011 6:56 pm

vjohn82 wrote:Yes, responding to your shite... I won't change your mind so now I won't bother.
Promise?

I, however, will continue to respond to your (McG-related) shite for as long as you continue to deny your responsibility for wrongfully involving children in your vendetta against Mr. McGrath.

I'll be interested to see if you have any actual interest in being a participating member of this forum or if, as I suspect, you just dropped in here to troll for some sympathy.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

vjohn82
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:08 am
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by vjohn82 » Fri Dec 30, 2011 7:29 pm

This is a media and hearing summary of the case: http://vjohn82libelcase.blogspot.com/2011/11/media.html

Feel free to read and comment (Seth can read, comment and generally spout abuse).

Judgment expected sometime in January.

vjohn82
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:08 am
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by vjohn82 » Sun Feb 05, 2012 1:55 pm

Still no judgment yet.

Seth, it seems, has made a new friend :qoti:

geehigh
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by geehigh » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:43 am

:read: Judgment given: Case struck out, no futher info available.

More will follow later I expect.

Cheers :tea:

User avatar
FBM
Ratz' first Gritizen.
Posts: 45327
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach"
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by FBM » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:45 am

Struck out, meaning thrown out of court for insufficient grounds or some such?
"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken

"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."

"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."

geehigh
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by geehigh » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:52 am

FBM wrote:Struck out, meaning thrown out of court for insufficient grounds or some such?
'Struck out' means it was indeed thrown out; as for the grounds I don't know. That's all that is available until the judgement is published. :td:

User avatar
FBM
Ratz' first Gritizen.
Posts: 45327
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach"
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by FBM » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:55 am

Gotcha. Thanks for the info. :cheers:
"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken

"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."

"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74129
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by JimC » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:56 am

Lawyers still made money, of that I am sure...
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
FBM
Ratz' first Gritizen.
Posts: 45327
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach"
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by FBM » Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:04 am

I can't find any stories about any recent developments online.
"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken

"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."

"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."

geehigh
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by geehigh » Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:50 am

FBM wrote:I can't find any stories about any recent developments online.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/JackofKent , http://twitter.com/#!/vaughanjones82 , http://twitter.com/#!/SLSingh

:td:

vjohn82
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:08 am
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by vjohn82 » Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:53 am

I hope to be in a position to write a little on the case soon. But, in summary...

The case was struck out. 60 pages allegations were narrowed down to 16 pages. These were then narrowed down to 4 or 5 sentences which the Judge found could be libellous but which had available defences.

The Judge decided it was not worth a trial to discover which one had the better prospect of defence and asked that, in light of this, whether I would be willing to agree not to repeat those sentences (or the meaning implied) in the future. I have, at this stage, agreed to do so to bring an end to the proceedings.

The claimant now has to pay £75,000 in costs (within 3 months), was denied permission to appeal and denied an attempt to have me committed to prison for "contempt of court".

vjohn82
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:08 am
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by vjohn82 » Sat Mar 31, 2012 11:28 am

I hope to be in a position to write a little on the case soon. But, in summary...

The case was struck out. 60 pages of allegations and argument was narrowed down, by a Master of the Court, to 16 pages. This was then narrowed down to 4 or 5 sentences which the Judge found 'could' be libellous but for which I had available defences to.

The Judge decided it was not worth a trial to hear the case and asked that, in light of this, whether I would be willing to agree not to repeat those sentences (or the meaning implied) in the future to bring an end to the case.

I have, at this stage, agreed to do so to bring an end to the proceedings. It was not worth increasing costs, time and stress if it could be brought to a quicker conclusion. I have a wife and two young children who need a husband and Father around the place.

Considering 95% of the case was struck out, there is no question that this is a victory on a number of levels which I will explain in due course. For example, the Judge ruled is not defamatory to call someone a Creationist. For those who debate religion and atheism this is quite an important finding by the High Court.

The claimant now has to pay £75,000 in costs (within 3 months), was denied permission to appeal and denied an attempt to have me committed to prison for "contempt of court".

The Claimant stated his intention to file a written application for permission to appeal.

User avatar
FBM
Ratz' first Gritizen.
Posts: 45327
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach"
Contact:

Re: Dawkins sued for libel

Post by FBM » Sat Mar 31, 2012 11:33 am

geehigh wrote:
FBM wrote:I can't find any stories about any recent developments online.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/JackofKent , http://twitter.com/#!/vaughanjones82 , http://twitter.com/#!/SLSingh

:td:
Ah. Gotcha. I'm not a twit, you see. :hehe: :cheers:
"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken

"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."

"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests