AC Grayling has won £20,000 libel damages against a Twitter user who accused him of being a paedophile in a case he said should act as a “marker” against irresponsible social media users.
The 69-year-old philosopher and Oxford University fellow was “distressed and enraged” after Peter North suggested he possessed videos showing child abuse in a tweet posted online in May last year.
The defamatory tweet read: “I’d bet good money that AC Grayling has a hard drive full of under age botty sex videos.”
Professor Grayling was alerted to the post by other Twitter users and said he felt so insulted that he was unable to ignore it as he launched legal action, the High Court heard.
North, who failed to file a defence,
I’d have at least tried the defence of mere common abuse….
There’s no doubt Twatter serves a valuable purpose. It repeatedly demonstrates how profoundly stupid so many self claimed intelligent people actually are.
AC Grayling has won £20,000 libel damages against a Twitter user who accused him of being a paedophile
£20,000 buys a lot of packets of sweets.
I wonder if Rocco has any insider information as to whether it was “the” Peter North.
He said he “would bet good money that he has…..” Doesn’t mean that he has, or that he’s saying that he has. I’d bet good money that this horse will win insnt the same as saying this horse will win.
The judge should also have fined Grayling at least 20k for being such an utterly pompous and insulting remainiac cvnt.
I hope it makes that ass Grayling feel better. In the old days, he would just have won a farthing. How the Law has deteriorated! If everyone from now on called him Botty Grayling, justice might still be served
Pete comments on the case here: https://peterjnorth.blogspot.com/2019/03/noncegate-revisited.html
Personally, I think that he should, as Tim says, have entered a defence of common abuse—or any defence. It has just allowed the MSM to paint his comment as indefensible.
DK
Guido points out that Mr North failed to offer a defence which if true, does everybody a disservice.
And doesn’t the other Mr North, (Richard?) of eureferendum fame have a son called Pete?
That’s exactly the one it is, yes.
North jr is just as much of a cock as Grayling.
The judge should have given him a piece of Twitter, too, as Twitter is no longer a “platform,” but is indeed a publisher. As such, should have responsibility for content.
Yes, clearly an error. There needs to be a hyphen.
North’s a nasty twat, much as I agree with a lot of what he says, but I don’t think that’s libellous.
The Defamation Act 2013 says the victim has to prove on balance of probabilities that the publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to his reputation.
How the fuck does notorious internet gobshite Pete North ‘betting’ in a tweet that Grayling is or does X meet that test? Who would think any less of Grayling on that basis? If North had said ‘I know he is does X’ that would be different, but he didn’t. As it was, it makes me think less of North, if anything.
I think his failure to defend himself is inexcusably stupid. Perhaps he thought he couldn’t afford the lawyers. I hope his house is in his wife’s name.
I hope he crowdfunds an appeal. I might lob in a fiver just on the pirnciple.
North Jr–like his father– has his heart roughly in the right place but both are incorrigible ego-men. Alright that is the human condition to some extent for all humanity but an esp strident “my way or the highway” slant is not helpful to anybody.
That said the FBPE etc evil and treasonous shite spread with their fingers by remainiacs would drive a stone to rage so low and scummy are large numbers of them. They should be driven out to their EU pals as were the American “loyalists” to Canada after the AWof I.
Apparently Peter North has engaged in a bit of botty sex himself, and apparently there are pictures.
In my defence I should point out that there is more than one the Peter North.
@Mark in Mayenne i March 6, 2019 at 10:57 am
+1
Some sort of stitch up/collusion to establish some precedent before rolling out the big claims?
There are limits on freedom of speech. You cannot slander, bully, or do racism, sexism, homophobia.
There is nothing wrong with being a remainer. I support Europe being united,
It is not being a traitor to support the EU. Only bigoted dumb dangerous nationalists would claim that.
The British economy was in trouble before we joined the EU.
I bet the UK economy will collapse after Brexit, due to narcissistic ignorant greedy nationalism.
London is based on the fiance economy that is benefited by being in the EU.
“You cannot slander, bully, or do racism, sexism, homophobia.”
Slander? Yes.
But the others will eventually be fixed. Freedom wins.