- This topic has 742 replies, 131 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
It’s one thing to post your own opinion (and say so) and quite a different matter posting up something that could be construed as being true.
On reflection, wit, the British legal philosophy seems strange in this case.<br>Fine to stop speculation about the details and outcome of the trial but not whether it still goes ahead. I can’t see how knowing this would prejudice anything.<br>Anyway, where are they going to find a jury whose members have not read something over the years?<br>They should trust, as I do, that facts can be discerned from suppositions.<br>
I’ve had to take down the recent ‘Fallon friends, etc’ thread on advice because of the very delicate nature of the ongoing court case and associated shennanigans.
While I appreciate that the case strikes at the very heart of racing and that discussion on a forum such as ours should be as wide-ranging and all-encompassing and as free as possible, I’m afraid that the reality is such that the interests of the forum are best served by asking members to refrain from discussion on the case until the court has reached a verdict and it’s findings have been made public.
As a published entity, we fall under the same laws, rules and guidelines as other media streams and, consequently, have to tread warily on such matters.
I would therefore ask that all members refrain from publishing posts on the forum which allude to the court case or the circumstances pertaining to it until such time as the legal proceedings have been concluded.
I am very sorry about this and hope everyone will understand our difficult position regarding this issue.
until such time as the legal proceedings have been concluded.
Jeez, that’ll be a long time.
(oops, have I said too much??!)
No worries,
Steve
Wouldn’t be very "free" for cormack if TRF got pulled into a libel action because someone put their thoughts up on this website, would it?
How do the Contempt of Court laws apply to someone with no connection with the case, that would like to express an opinion on it? This is the biggest story in racing at the moment and yet we can’t talk about it on this forum.
Contempt of Court is obviously a bit hyperbolic, but cases of libel would in the eyes of the law be totally viable if someone posted their poisonous thoughts on any of the defendants on a high-profile internet forum, viewable by all and sundry!
Easy to call it hyperbolic when you’re not liable.
From http://www.yourrights.org.uk/your-right … ourt.shtml
In 1996 the Court of Appeal found that the makers of the television programme Have I Got News For You were in contempt of court when jokes were made that the Maxwell brothers (who were to be tried for the Mirror Group pension fraud) were obviously guilty of fraudulent conduct, even though the programme was broadcast six months before the trial.
Now whilst I doubt that TRF has quite the reach of Have I Got News For You, the fact that there’s precedent for a broadcaster/publisher to be held in contempt for broadcasting/publishing someone uttering – even in jest – that someone is guilty of a charge, you can hardly expect the TRF admin to throw caution to the wind, can you?
The newpapers and television channels can cover the trial and, to an extent, comment because they can afford lawyers with the competence to keep them on the right side of the law, and if occasionally they get it wrong they have the resources to meet any fine.
The proprietor, whom one assumes is not a lawyer with the relevant expertise, clearly cannot be expected to retain one regularly to monitor the thread and advise him if a potentially prejudicial post appears. So it is perfectly understandable that he is being cautious and asking that discussion should cease.
- Total Posts 17716
Without wishing in any way to compromise anyone, and using only what is reported on the RP website:
http://www.racingpost.co.uk/news/master … tegory=The Fallon trial&story_id=931923
I find it incredible that they have flown an expert witness half way round the world to point out something so obvious my 10 year old niece could have done the job.
Davidjohnson
Of course there is, but it takes experience, and discipline in the use of adjectives and adverbs, to do the former without inadvertently doing the latter.
By no means all comment would put one at risk from the law – and I’m confident that nothing on the now deleted thread came close to doing so. But one needs to be an expert to be sure, and one can understand why the proprietor has decided to take no chance.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.