In this country the libel laws are fairly tough and 'truth' is not
actually a test for libel or slander.
If you can prove malice, then the truth of a statement (or image) is
not necessarily relevant.
It covers blackmail situations nicely.
"Reckless disregard..."? - how quaint!
Andrew Fildes
afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 11/11/2007, at 9:47 AM, Bob Whitmire wrote:
> Malice is also the test of whether public figgers can recover for
> libel or slander. Under most circumstances they can't, but if they
> can prove the news organization was prompted by either malice or
> reckless disregard for the truth, the checkbooks might have to open.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|