oscarBravo Custodiam ipsos custodes
#121

So ask RTE.

I'm curious whether Ganley actually will sue. I'll be mildly surprised if he does. From experience, RTE tend to be cautious about getting their facts straight. I don't believe for a moment that they straight-out fabricated witness statements.

1 person has thanked this post
#122

Eurosceptic2008 said:
If Ganley is going to sue, he must have basis for doing so.

If he is going to sue - so far we have a threat of legal action, which is little more than PR that can then be used by his supporters to speculate that "he must have basis for doing so". Just as you are now doing, BTW.

Even if he does sue, this does not mean that he has a strong case, or a particularly good basis for legal action. Sometimes it is enough to be seen to be suing, especially if the result of any such case does not come out until after a strategic milestone (such as the European elections).

Given this he may have a good basis for suing, and may win, too - but we don't even have enough information to speculate on this at present, let alone form opinions. All I can say, is that regardless of the strengths his potential case, threatening to sue is a good PR move, as might the PR benefits be of even an unsuccessful case if timed right. This is independent of whether RTE can be sued successfully or not.
oscarBravo said:
From experience, RTE tend to be cautious about getting their facts straight. I don't believe for a moment that they straight-out fabricated witness statements.

I think it highly unlikely that they would have fabricated witness statements. Of course, whether they can subsequently prove they said this, or that they are not simply repeating libellous claims (which are libellous in itself) are another thing.

1 person has thanked this post
molloyjh Registered User
#123

mumhaabu said:
RTÉ set out deliberately to tar the guy as some sort of corrupt criminal and did a real hatchet job on him.


What I find so funny about this statement is that Declan Ganley did the very same thing to the Lisbon Treaty as RTE are being accused of doing to him...

1 person has thanked this post
#124

molloyjh said:
What I find so funny about this statement is that Declan Ganley did the very same thing to the Lisbon Treaty as RTE are being accused of doing to him...

Source of money and goal are different.

snubbleste Banned
#125

oscarBravo said:
I'm curious whether Ganley actually will sue. I'll be mildly surprised if he does. From experience, RTE tend to be cautious about getting their facts straight. I don't believe for a moment that they straight-out fabricated witness statements.
And mildly surprised you are!

Ganley to sue Rté for defamation over this programme broadcast November 2008
The legal action relates to a Prime Time programme, which aired in November 2008, during the Lisbon Treaty Referendum.
Mr. Ganley believes that the programme contained "extremely serious, defamatory allegations" against him.
He also accuses the Prime Time team of attempting to discredit him both personally and professionally and undermine his opposition to the Lisbon Treaty. http://www.galwaynews.ie/23301-declan-ganley-sue-rte-defamation

#126

oscarBravo said:
I'm curious whether Ganley actually will sue. I'll be mildly surprised if he does. From experience, RTE tend to be cautious about getting their facts straight. I don't believe for a moment that they straight-out fabricated witness statements.

I might have agreed with you three years ago when you posted this, but following Philip Boucher-Hayes's screw up over the Pamela Izevbekhai case, I'd have considerably less faith in their competence. I'm surprised he kept his job after that, TBH.

1 person has thanked this post
bbbbb Registered User
#127

in today's indo
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/ganley-takes-legal-action-over-rtes-prime-time-report-2967017.html

The plenary summons, which was served last Friday evening, comes three years after the programme -- which Mr Ganley believes contained "extremely serious, defamatory allegations" against him -- was aired.

#128

He took him three years to figure out he was slandered? Very oppurtuntist timing by Mr. Ganley.

snubbleste Banned
#129

It's not really. Ganley stated publicly a week after the broadcast that he planned to sue rté, see post #97.
It was updated in May 2009 to:
A file is being prepared for what Mr Ganley said would be a significant and extensive legal action against RTÉ and Prime Time.

oscarBravo Custodiam ipsos custodes
#130

I'm sure it's pure coincidence that this case is suddenly ready to go to court within weeks of the "Mission to Prey" fallout.

Dob74 Registered User
#131

oscarBravo said:
I'm sure it's pure coincidence that this case is suddenly ready to go to court within weeks of the "Mission to Prey" fallout.



And the up coming Treaty vote. Ganley hasnt much pull over the media like the gov or large political parties.
So i am sure rte wont be as tough on him as they have in the past. Or a least that what he is thinking.

#132

snubbleste said:
It's not really. Ganley stated publicly a week after the broadcast that he planned to sue rté, see post #97.
It was updated in May 2009 to:

Legally irrelevant. Indeed, delaying prosecuting a case of libel can actually work against you - a court will ask why you didn't sue at the start when it first happened, and Ganley would have to have a good reason for this.

It's possible that he has attained evidence only recently that would help him win a case, although I don't know how this would help him as the onus of evidence is on the defence and not prosecution in a libel case (maybe evidence supporting claims has instead been 'neutralized'). Perhaps he just wants the publicity for an ulterior motive. Perhaps he didn't have the money to pursue such a case three years ago.

Whatever the reason(s) for his delay they are occult to us; more-so than any other personality in Irish politics Ganley seems to have a scheme within a plan hidden behind a stated intention. Or not.

It's why I find him the most entertaining personality in Irish politics.

1 person has thanked this post
Scofflaw Registered User
#133

In a statement, the Libertas chairman said his legal advice was that the programme was actionable.

A file is being prepared for what Mr Ganley said would be a significant and extensive legal action against RTÉ and Prime Time.

RTÉ has said it has not had any contact from Mr Ganley or Libertas in relation to the matter and so was unable to comment at this time.

The station said Prime Time fully stood over the programme as broadcast.


Guess the date...

amused,
Scofflaw

snubbleste Banned
#134

Monica Leech bought a defamation case against a newspaper group in 2009 for articles printed about her in 2004. It was found she was defamed. Go figure the 4+ year timeframe.

chunkylover4 Registered User
#135

The statute of limitations is two years if you can prove that a special reason exists as to why it should be extended from one year.
However if the material is still available then publication is ongoing so possibly the material is available online?
38.— (1) Section 11 of the Act of 1957 is amended—
(a) in subsection (2), by the substitution of the following paragraph for paragraph (c):
“(c) A defamation action within the meaning of the Defamation Act 2009 shall not be brought after the expiration of—
(i) one year, or
(ii) such longer period as the court may direct not exceeding 2 years,
from the date on which the cause of action accrued

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!