Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

Ched Evans moved?????



Goldstone1976

Goldstone1976

We Got Calde in!!
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Apr 30, 2013
13,783
Herts
Triggaaar said:
How sure are you? If it was the same with Twitter, the owners would be in jail - they must get around it somehow.
Click to expand...

The law about whether the owner/editor/publisher of a social media site is liable in a potential defamation case is complex and fast moving, as a quick Google search would show you.

NSC has long taken the view that we'd rather not be a test case, having neither the time, money or inclination to defend a defamation suit brought by a claimant. Better safe than sorry, is the approach we're adopting.

As an aside, there are plenty of cases where claims have been made against Google, FB, Twitter, etc. Many have been thrown out; some have succeeded. We're not planning on being cutesy with E&W libel law and finding out where the boundaries are.

TL;DR: We're not interested in being 'sure' of NSC's ability to defend ourselves against a defamation case; we're instead interested in never having to find out.

Here's just one example exemplifying the complexities:


http://www.bwbllp.com/file/bwb-pandr-aut13-socialmedia-pdf
 




BadFish

BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
17,102
Steve in Japan said:
There are the makings of a cautionary presentation to all young men and women from this case. It might start by saying "make sure you have at least spoken to each other first". Old fashioned, I know.
Click to expand...

Remembering her name is downright chivalrous.
 


Robot Chicken

Robot Chicken

Seriously?
Jul 5, 2003
13,154
Chicken World
Triggaaar said:
How sure are you? If it was the same with Twitter, the owners would be in jail - they must get around it somehow.
Click to expand...

NSC Forum Rules
Registration to this forum is free! We do insist that you abide by the rules and policies detailed below. If you agree to the terms, please check the 'I agree' checkbox and press the 'Complete Registration' button below.If you would like to cancel the registration, click here to return to the forums index.

Although the administrators and moderators of North Stand Chat will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this site, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of North Stand Chat, nor vBulletin Solutions, Inc. (developers of vBulletin) will be held responsible for the content of any message.

By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar,sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

The owners of North Stand Chat reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any content item for any reason.
 


Uncle Spielberg

Uncle Spielberg

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 6, 2003
42,812
Lancing
Westdene Seagull said:
You can't be found innocent in an English court.
Click to expand...

Tell that to all the BBC reporters yesterday then who all referred to him as being found Innocent, anyway not guilty is innocent to me and most other people I would think
 


Westdene Seagull

Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,003
The arse end of Hangleton
Uncle Spielberg said:
Tell that to all the BBC reporters yesterday then who all referred to him as being found Innocent, anyway not guilty is innocent to me and most other people I would think
Click to expand...

I suggest you read the link El Pres posted. It clearly, and simply, explains how not guilty does not mean innocent.
 






Triggaaar

Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,167
Goldstone
Goldstone1976 said:
Better safe than sorry, is the approach we're adopting.
Click to expand...
Sounds pretty sensible.

TL;DR: We're not interested in being 'sure' of NSC's ability to defend ourselves against a defamation case; we're instead interested in never having to find out.
Click to expand...
I quite agree. I was questioning Oxy McFloppie Tish's post, as he said Bozza was liable for any libel. I don't think Oxy knows that and I disagree, although I agree with the idea of removing posts just to be safe.
 


drew

drew

Drew
Oct 3, 2006
23,048
Burgess Hill
portlock seagull said:
Brighton get a mention in this Telegraph opinion piece on the case tonight. I bet Huddersfield are having a word with their midfielder who deserves the nickname "pencil" now for the rest of his life. Unbelievable stupidity despite the reversed conviction:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football...just-how-sick-football-culture-in-britain-is/
Click to expand...


Absolute joke of an article. Tarring the whole of football with the actions of a minority. That coming from someone who's colleagues paid to hack the phone of a dead girl. Perhaps we should think of all journalists as lowlife like that. As for the comment about the PFA teams he wasn't convicted until 20th April that is certainly long after ballot papers were returned (the ceremony was only 2 days later). The vote is not by the PFA but by fellow professionals!
 








The Merry Prankster

The Merry Prankster

Pactum serva
Aug 19, 2006
5,577
Shoreham Beach
Uncle Spielberg said:
Tell that to all the BBC reporters yesterday then who all referred to him as being found Innocent, anyway not guilty is innocent to me and most other people I would think
Click to expand...

I wouldn't and I don't think anyone who's ever spent anytime thinking about our legal system would. Perhaps the Scottish version of 'not proven' is clearer.
 




T

Tooting Gull

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
11,033
Goldstone1976 said:
The law about whether the owner/editor/publisher of a social media site is liable in a potential defamation case is complex and fast moving, as a quick Google search would show you.

NSC has long taken the view that we'd rather not be a test case, having neither the time, money or inclination to defend a defamation suit brought by a claimant. Better safe than sorry, is the approach we're adopting.

As an aside, there are plenty of cases where claims have been made against Google, FB, Twitter, etc. Many have been thrown out; some have succeeded. We're not planning on being cutesy with E&W libel law and finding out where the boundaries are.

TL;DR: We're not interested in being 'sure' of NSC's ability to defend ourselves against a defamation case; we're instead interested in never having to find out.

Here's just one example exemplifying the complexities:


http://www.bwbllp.com/file/bwb-pandr-aut13-socialmedia-pdf
Click to expand...

I think this is the NSC position outlined pretty accurately, and you can fully understand where Bozza/mods are coming from.

The one thing I would say, that this is missing, is that you it would be really good if one or more of the mods knew a bit more about libel.

The obvious reason for saying that is if you don't, you always 'play safe' and everything, even important stuff that might be the right side of the line, never sees the light of day and you get a very sanitised debate. If NSC had been around at the time of Belotti and Archer, this approach would have meant virtually none of the criticisms and concerns would have been aired.

It is not a criticism, just something to think about because the same is true of critical threads concerning the club, we don't want to get rid of everything that upsets Paul Barber, but we don't want genuine law suits. It's a balancing act.
 


B

Beach Seagull

New member
Jan 2, 2010
1,310
Triggaaar said:
Maybe it will come back after the mods have had a chance to edit it. Or maybe they don't have time, and it's just easier to remove it.

I think someone called him a rapist, which is libel. I didn't see much more than that, but there may have been. I'll give you a quick summary of the whole case though:

I was right all along.
I told you so.
Click to expand...

So was I!!! Said back in Oct / Nov 2014 I believed him to be innocent. Nice to be proved correct!!! Would love to see CE up front for us.
 










Honky Tonx

Honky Tonx

New member
Jun 9, 2014
872
Lewes
I hope all of those who laid into Ched Evans now have the balls and decency to stand up and apologise. It's very easy to wade in on a social media site, such as NSC, and have a go and then when proven wrong simply simply disappear behind a veil of silence. If the original Guilty verdict had been upheld, would the original thread topic, so widely debated, have been taken down/moved? I doubt it.
 








drew

drew

Drew
Oct 3, 2006
23,048
Burgess Hill
Honky Tonx said:
I hope all of those who laid into Ched Evans now have the balls and decency to stand up and apologise. It's very easy to wade in on a social media site, such as NSC, and have a go and then when proven wrong simply simply disappear behind a veil of silence. If the original Guilty verdict had been upheld, would the original thread topic, so widely debated, have been taken down/moved? I doubt it.
Click to expand...

As I said repeatedly on the original thread, the evidence available, in my opinion, meant that he should never have been convicted in the first place, ie beyond reasonable doubt but to be fair, his laddish behaviour that night remains inexcusable, especially as he was already in a relationship.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here