I see Mary Lou is joining the compo culture brigade with a defamation lawsuit against RTE.
No. But you should have told the whiplash fella you were fully supporting, not to proceed. I don't have her contact details.
The courts don't save or expend any of their own money.
MLMD could easily have asked for a right of reply had she so wished. She did not. She is often on RTE many times a week.
Right of reply does not affect the definition of whether something is defamatory to begin or not. If it is defamatory, then the right to reply will mitigate the damages due. But it will still be defamatory. And the absence of a right to reply does not make something defamatory which would not have otherwise been
If they are going to discuss her (or anyone else),they should make reasonble provisions to have that person there at the time
Whole thing ends as a farce otherwise
Well that would make for boring radio Blaaz. There'd be nothing on the news tonight. No news about Russia unless they can get Putin into the studio.
No more analysis at half time on the Sunday Game either unless they can drag the lads into the studio during the break
While you are against any defamation case against Jimmy Saville, I would support the alleged victims right to sue.
Same goes for Alan Farrell. While it turned out he was chancing his arm, or neck, he had every right to try, which I support. If only you'd afford the same rights to the victims of Jimmy Saville.
As ive said,the political discourse has been poisioned (or made not boring),to the extent,that now a large amount of it borders defamation
Like you cant honestly expect to gain a full grasp on affairs in ukraine,without some military expert also on,to offer insight into what russia is doing....otherwise all you'll end up with is overly emotional dogma,which borders propaganda
Dude, you ain't grasping the legal process at all. It ain't hard, and I'm not referring to specialisation in it but understanding the simple certainty that disclosure of criminal evidence in a civil trial will result in criminal investigation.
Addressing the salient points of several posters here who have trashed your poor arguments is preferable to going off on an irrelevant tangent. But hey, that'd be aiming to refute solid points and that may be a little to challenging. Bluster and obfuscation is easier, even if it makes you look silly.
If she wins they'll slag off the legal system. If she loses they'll endorse it. Without understanding any of the judgements involved.
I think there is much to criticise about SF and much to applaud. I gave Mairead Farrell my fourth preference last time but it'll be higher next time, first or second. As it will for their other candidates nationally. My greatest hope is that they can form a government with the other progressives so we have a coalition without the presence of FF or FG. what a day that would be for the country.
Just can't help yourself removing a person's rights when it suits, can you?
Lol. Your ignorance is quite funny.
Can I have those links where you told me that the bigliest has already been charged with assaulting anyone?
C'mon, you said you had it. Where is the proof? In your head? Maybe someone in HQ told you and you don't have the capacity to think for yourself beyond that?
You've been called out on your ignorance and yet ya keep digging.
Farrell won 2,500. Which, by your stated standards, means you cannot criticise him.
It's too easy when you guys are so blindly hypocritical.
The ones you made up? He was a chancer who won his claim. He'd a right to claim. He was a chancer.
You keep embarrassing yourself. Please, continue :)
Donald still pretending not to understand the fundamental difference. Boring.
Lads, no need for the bare faced hypocrisy. Simply apply the same standards to everyone.
I'll invite you to agree that it will remain perfectly valid for anyone to criticise McDonald and SF for filing this case regardless of the outcome in court, or pre-court settlement or withdrawal
I could nearly write what they'll be saying if she wins now Donald. It's as predictable as the sun rising in the morning.
Yep. Its getting old, acting the fool to make the same 'error' over and over.
End of the day we've two lads making tits of themselves because MLMD is suing RTE.
It's a simple statement Francie. Will SF/MLMD remain open to criticism for filing this case if they
A) settle
B) withdraw
C) win
D) lose
My position is that anyone remains subject to criticism for filing any case regardless of the outcome.
Just to help you - MB did (B). AF did (B) and (C). He withdrew for damage to his car but continued for personal injury. Is it as predictable as the sun rising in the morning what your response is to his win.?
Or you can keep talking out of your both sides of your mouth at once and ignore the question
It's boring Donald.
Thought as much.
Avoid & deflect and keep talking out of both sides of your mouth at the same time.
I don't criticise/degrade/or ciminalise those who excercise their right to redress Donnie boy.
There are those who wish to remove that right from certain people. Read their thoughts on this very thread. They have decided her motives and issued their judgement from the get go.
Zero principles Francie. What you'll claim as a principle today will be flipped 180 degrees tomorrow as soon as the badge changes. You have no credibility on any of this. You don't want to state anything up front because your "principles" will simply be whatever your leader does and what happens. You need to wait to be told what to think/say.
Bringing up your strawman again anyway. Good lad.
Time for some invective now. Boring Donald, boring.
Go on and find where I criticised anyone for excercising their right to redress. Then have a look at the track record of some on this thread and selective leaps to judgement.
That's fine.
You supported Alan Farrel and him taking his personal injury case. No worries. I won't criticise him for it any more.
Or MB for exercising her right to file for redress. I'll say no more about her. Just in case you get upset.
I supported Alan's right to take a case and MB's, that is why you will find no criticism from me when they filed.
It's boring now Donald, boring.
Legal actions dude, legal actions. I did the work for you and gave you the names. The rest ain’t difficult.
Francie will defend O.J.'s innocence for all time. If Graham Dwyer wins his appeal, he will become another innocent man wronged by the justice system.
No, he is correct. Not a single person on this thread has been able to identify a single aspect of RTE's coverage of Mary-Lou that lowers her reputation.
Was Al Capone guilty of anything more than tax evasion?
ROFL.
Haul out all the emotive cases you want blanch.
Just shows you have a selective approach to rights and who may avail of them. Reminds of a certain ideology in the north of the island and the similarity of your ideology.
My my. Still creating scenarios a la 'if my auntie had balls'.
Beyond obsession now.
People have the right to sue.
We can pass opinion on a case either positively or negatively, yet still support the persons rights.
Pretending not to understand this so you can throw horse apples of your own making is just desperate.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c6e76a2e0d85c3808d93c2f75a0c528d.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/fd886e8068d0cf75a5ff800614b8489e.svg)
