3 ms·
The paper's that did that made clearly libellous claims - because the couple had not yet been charged with an offence when their names were published. Those pap
by redcalx 8y ago
The paper's that did that made clearly libellous claims - because the couple had not yet been charged with an offence when their names were published. Those paper's can now expect libel claims against them, although given the clear breach of libel law I expect they will wish to settle out of court rather than take on the extra expense of a court case they can't win.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- monochromatic 8y agoI’m not too familiar with UK libel law. Is it not a defense that they were reporting on statements they were given? Is there a reasonableness question?
- abrowne 8y agoAFAIK the police specifically didn't release the names.
- redcalx 8y agoAs per a sibling comment, the names were leaked, they were not officially announced.
- ams6110 8y agoI thought there was an actually arrest made? Don't know about the UK, but in the US arrests are public record.
- DanBC 8y agoThere's a difference between saying "Mr and Mrs Bloggs were arrested in connection to the Gatwick drone chaos" and "ARE THESE THE MORONS WHO RUINED CHRISTMAS?" in 144pt font on the front page with a fuck-off huge photo of them. http://suttonnick.tumblr.com/post/181330292801/hendopolis-mail-on-sunday-are-these-the-morons http://suttonnick.tumblr.com/post/181330292801/hendopolis-ma... But this newspaper probably won't have to pay out anything. They've been careful with their wording; they do this a lot; they have lawyers on staff; and defamation is difficult in the UK.