What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Non Footy Chat Thread II

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
79,875
So you can make any damaging claim about someone if they're unable to prove it is false?
Toldya before, the court needs to be satisfied that you were in fact defamed, and if so, because of the public utterance a reasonable person would think less of you.

Josh (remember Josh?) lost out big. The jury decided that he was in fact a merkin. So, no soup for you !


Mr Massoud had rung a number of colleagues to track down who had released the story. When Mr Massoud spoke to Mr Warren, his evidence (with the contemporaneous evidence of those who spoke to him straight afterwards) was that Mr Massoud said, “The only thing that’s stopping me coming up there and slitting your throat and shitting down it is that you’re young.” The incident left the junior colleague distressed and crying.

The conversation was published by the 5 media outlets — 2GB Sydney, Fox Sports Australia, the Commonwealth Broadcasting Corporation, Nine Digital and Nationwide News. Mr Massoud argued that the publications conveyed defamatory meanings, namely imputations that he:

• threatened to slit the throat of a young colleague

• made graphic threats to kill a young colleague

• threatened a young reporter/colleague with violence, and

• was never a respected journalist.

Mr Massoud argued that he did not use the words “slitting your throat” (which he asserted conveyed a terrorist meaning), but rather said something that was impossible (which, therefore, wasn’t a threat) like “ripping off your head.” He also asserted that the condition “if you weren’t so young” showed there was no threat.


Molan’s case is that she disagrees with a news site’s interpretation of the ooka moooka thing that she was being racist at the time. Apparently the defence has found other instances of her broadcasting, once when she used a asian prostitute’s voice.

Unsure if the “apple doesn’t fall far from the tree” idoim is true. We’ll see.

 
Last edited:

Gary Gutful

Post Whore
Messages
53,926
the melodies, yes

but those lame lyrics, I don't think so, I mean I wanna hold your hand won't cut it when nowdays they can have 40 girls in 40 nights
She’s well acquainted with the touch of a velvet hand like a lizard on a window pane.
The man in the crowd with the multi-coloured mirrors on his hobnail boots.
Lying with his eyes while his hands are busy working overtime.
A soap impression of his wife which he ate and donated to the National Trust.
 

Avenger

Immortal
Messages
35,984
Looks like the defendant carries the burden of proof, not Molan.
The onus of proof lies upon the defendant to establish matters relevant to the defences, such as qualified privilege, but once these elements have been established, the burden of establishing malice lies on the plaintiff, not upon the defendant: Dillon v Cush [2010] NSWCA 165 at [63]–[67].
 

Latest posts

Top