Missing Milly Dowler's voicemail "hacked by News of the World"

[belboid]

The enemy of your enemy is your friend, huh?

God, you seem as wilfully blind as Metropolitan Police Commander!

It's nothing to do with wthose side anyone is on, nor whether it might well be the case that the Mirror also used the same tactics.

It's to do with the FACT - one that neither you nor the idiot Mensch can admit - that her claim was simply WRONG. And, therefore, libellous.

Only a cretin would try and continue with the claim, which does nothing except move the spotlight away from the Murdochs. I suspect that was Mensch's idea. Why is it yours?

 

[pk]

Piers Morgan is as guilty as fuck, we know it, he knows it, Mensch invoking his name is a good thing and there is fuck all he can do about it. Libel my arse, she has parliamentary privelige.

 

[invisibleplanet]

God, you seem as wilfully blind as Metropolitan Police Commander!

It's nothing to do with wthose side anyone is on, nor whether it might well be the case that the Mirror also used the same tactics.

It's to do with the FACT - one that neither you nor the idiot Mensch can admit - that her claim was simply WRONG. And, therefore, libellous.

Only a cretin would try and continue with the claim, which does nothing except move the spotlight away from the Murdochs. I suspect that was Mensch's idea. Why is it yours?

I suspect you're the only cretin here, given your consistent and quick resort to insults, whenever someone on urban disagrees with you.

It emphasises the overall culpability of whoever is editor (i.e. Brooks). Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't make the Murdochs less culpable, given the recent revelations about Fox News' 'Brain Room'.

 

[killer b]

Piers Morgan is as guilty as fuck, we know it, he knows it, Mensch invoking his name is a good thing and there is fuck all he can do about it. Libel my arse, she has parliamentary privelige.

it could have been a good thing, had she not made up a load of stuff when invoking his name. as it is, she's just given him ammo for the rinsing he gave her, and no doubt more over the coming days.

 

[belboid]

I suspect you're the only cretin here, given your consistent and quick resort to insults, whenever someone on urban disagrees with you.

It emphasises the overall culpability of whoever is editor. Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't make the Murdochs less culpable, given the recent revelations about Fox News' 'Brain Room'.

aah diddums. Mensch got it wrong. you got it wrong. You dont understand what libel is.

 

[gabi]

Jesus. just seen that piers morgan video. how the fuck did that smirking idiot get elected let alone anywhere near a select committee?

 

[invisibleplanet]

look closer at the context.

I did. Three little letters spring to mind, DTI.

 

[invisibleplanet]

aah diddums. Mensch got it wrong. you got it wrong.

I've been quite clear about Morgan's book, Mensch's mistakes in attribution, and where the various quotes come from.

You dont understand what libel is.

Nor does Piers, it seems. Why hasn't he sued/challenged Guido Fawkes, and then the Daily Express for publishing the story on the Mirror's 2002 Scoop being based on information gleaned from phone-hacking? (Libel, as opposed to slander). Why focus only on Mensch?

Thursday July 14 2011 by Daily Express Reporter
TALENT show host Piers Morgan faces political pressure to testify at the phone hacking inquiry after being “exposed” over a Fleet Street scoop.
Three Conservative MPs – Aidan Burley, Nigel Adams and Douglas Carswell – have demanded, via the internet Guido Fawkes blogging site, that the former Daily Mirror editor give evidence over claims a 2002 scoop was linked to phone hacking.
The story, revealing an affair between Ulrika Jonsson and Sven Goran Eriksson, was allegedly the result of hacking into Ms Jonsson’s voicemail.
Mr Morgan, who now hosts a TV chat show on US network CNN, declined to comment last night

14th July: TELL US ABOUT ULRIKA SCOOP, MPS ASK PIERS MORGAN: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view...ll-us-about-Ulrika-scoop-MPs-ask-Piers-Morgan

 

[Santino]

Slander, not libel.

 

[invisibleplanet]

Slander, not libel.

Is it slander if you have immunity?
Again, why go after the one who is immune, when it's already been in the public domain for a week (earliest I could find was 12th July). And because it's published, it's libel, isn't it?

 

[two sheds]

I've been quite clear about Morgan's book, Mensch's mistakes in attribution, and where the various quotes come from.

This.

We're agreeing that Mensch got it wrong. She should have checked her facts. She may be open to a libel suit if she repeats the allegations outside parliamentary privilege.

However.

If if it came out in the court case that Moron *actually did or oversaw* the things she alleged, then I wonder whether Moron would win the case.

*yes fair do's slander unless it's repeated written down*

 

[gabi]

parliamentary privilege is a fucking joke if shes allowed to get away with that

 

[pk]

it could have been a good thing, had she not made up a load of stuff when invoking his name. as it is, she's just given him ammo for the rinsing he gave her, and no doubt more over the coming days.

The way I see it, Piers Moron being slandered with no hope of legal retribution is what he got away with for years.

Mensch is just settling the score. Good luck to her. He's up to his neck in it and nothing would be sweeter than his fall from grace in the USA.

Besides, she's the hottest MP we have. Has to count for something...

 

[two sheds]

You dont understand what libel is.

 

[killer b]

Again, why go after the one who is immune, when it's already been in the public domain for a week

moron will have prefered not to raise it, i expect. guido is unlikely to be widely read in the USA (moron's market now), whereas yesterday's hearings were broadcast live there, and were big news - he had no choice but to respond.

 

[gavman]

Is Mrs Rupert the attractive oriental chic in the pink?

She dived over Murdoch and gave someone a right-hander!

i'm in love. what a gal

 

[agricola]

aah diddums. Mensch got it wrong. you got it wrong. You dont understand what libel is.

It wasnt a libel. For a start, she was covered by absolute privilege, and hasnt repeated it outside of that privilege. Secondly, the bit she did get wrong - that Moron had admitted in his book that he had partaken in phone hacking - is not exactly something that would make the average person think worse of Piers Morgan (he is after all Piers Morgan, with all that entails), given how close it is to what he did say (that he knew how it was done) and it has a good chance of being true anyway - look how the story came out, and the other activities of Moron and the Mirror journalists at the time.

 

[invisibleplanet]

Since the information has been in the public domain for at least 8 days, published now by two sources (Guido Fawkes, Daily Express), could you please inform that lover of the term 'cretin' belboid, that I'm well aware of what constitutes libel.

 

[kabbes]

Since we're throwing around accusations of not knowing libel laws, here, two things are worth pointing out to those insisting it is libel:

a) As Santino has referenced, it can't be libel since she didn't put it in print. It would be slander.
b) It can't be either slander or libel since the whole affair is protected by parliamentary privilege. Legally, both "libel" and "slander" have specific meanings and neither meaning includes generically "telling an untruth, regardless of circumstances or context."

 

[two sheds]

Since the information has been in the public domain for at least 8 days, published now by two sources (Guido Fawkes, Daily Express), could you please inform that lover of the term 'cretin' belboid, that I'm well aware of what constitutes libel.

My was because it wasn't libel it was slander (or - in fact - as you point out because she had parliamentary privilege wasn't even slander).

eta. tut kabbes has faster reactions

 

[kabbes]

Er yeah, plus this:

Secondly, the bit she did get wrong - that Moron had admitted in his book that he had partaken in phone hacking - is not exactly something that would make the average person think worse of Piers Morgan (he is after all Piers Morgan, with all that entails), given how close it is to what he did say (that he knew how it was done) and it has a good chance of being true anyway - look how the story came out, and the other activities of Moron and the Mirror journalists at the time.

 

[kabbes]

Because even taking it away from the slander/libel confusion and the parliamentary privilege, the fact is that if I am a notorious murderer and I write, "The third murder wot I done was when I caved in Jimmy the Sparra's head wiv a wrench" and then you subsequently write elsewhere that "kabbes the notorious murderer stabbed Jimmy the Sparra with a shiv" then you will not have committed libel.

 

[invisibleplanet]

eta. tut kabbes has faster reactions

You've been kabbesed. It happens to me all the time

 

[pk]

If it gets journos digging into Piers Moron's dustbins - it's all good.

 

[Santino]

Ha ha, Morgan > Moron, I've just got that.

 

[killer b]

thinking about it, it's probably good all round - it turns the heat up on moron a bit, and makes a rising tory mp look like a muppet.

plus, their CNN row was pure gold.

 

[invisibleplanet]

Hasn't moron been defending murdoch and brooks?

 

[Teaboy]

Moron is just full of bluster, sabre rattling if you like. He knows the threats are enough to make people think twice.

 

[killer b]

Hasn't moron been defending murdoch and brooks?

he had been, but made some comments yesterday disagreeing with some of their select committee evidence. i think.

 

[agricola]

Hasn't moron been defending murdoch and brooks?

and Coulson, at least before the Coulson season opened.