I was really shocked at the recent case of a television personality who having been followed was filmed through her hotel room keyhole and caught naked when changing. How in goodness sake can a court award $55,000,000 dollars? These events are ridiculous and there have been other massive cases but this sticks in the gullet.
Will you never tire of crocheting? :)
Sewing? Yeah, that's a pain in the ass. I did laundry and discovered that the button fell off a pair of pants. So I tried to sew it back on, but had difficulty getting the thread through the needle eye. I wonder if they sell prethreaded needles and you just need to tie the right color thread to the end?
I always check the keyhole before undressing. :left: :right:
Sewing ➜ ➜ ➜(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/253164678/sewing.gif)
Sewing ➜ ➜ ➜(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/253164678/sewing.gif)
It actually took me a while to understand what the OP was saying. I thought there was a wardrobe malfunction on a pair of pants or something so that the television personality had to go and change clothes. :right:
Edit: in any case, Oak linked to a story about this
Told ya so! (http://email.pjmedia.com/HS?b=GQ_LzmuTpEr24TfuhYhK_cIWsI2dGkaef1UjVmYiqi-642Ahn4sCVzwU3kCJGU6R&c=NM8oYKeuVcNQpvpttrdhmg)
FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai warned consumers that free mobile video streaming might be found in violation of the agency’s new rules and that a national broadband tax could soon pop up on consumers’ Internet bills.
Net Neutrality… Sure.
(Not sure what it has to do with net neutrality, though. Wrong link, one assumes.)
Mr. Howie will be the cause of the UK becoming a republic.
Everyday he butchers the Queen's English.
The lady will never see the $55 million. Even if Marriott has to pay $27 million, which is unlikely, her attorneys will get about 40% of it.
(T)he Nashville Marriott and the company that operates it responsible for a little less than $27 million. But Andrews won’t get that amount either.
The hotel’s legal team has not yet announced their plans, but Sanders says they will ask Davidson County Circuit Court Judge Hamilton Gayden to do one of three things — overturn the whole judgment, ask for a new trial or request a reduction in damages. “It’s very rare for a judge to overturn a case like this,” says Sanders. “He’d have to believe that the jury had lost its mind.”
Many legal experts predict that the case will end in a settlement before it goes to appeals court. “If I’m the defendant, I’d make my settlement push now, because the farther this case goes, the stronger the position of Andrews becomes,” says Sanders, noting that it’s unlikely that an appellate court that wasn’t present for the original proceedings would overturn the judgment.
And...
Sanders, who practices in the same county in which this case took place, was surprised at the judgment. “Davidson County juries have a reputation for being parsimonious,” he says. “I’m shocked at the amount. There have been people who have been killed because of negligence who’ve gotten a lot less than this.”
Yes, I mistyped and know that but try and answer the point but not being born in the ex-colonies equally not brained into being thought perfect.
On a lesser infantile remark Colonel we are as much chance of being a Republic as you have of being a democracy. Years ago a person got a ten figure sum for her McDonald's coffee being too hot.
Now smart mouths explain the suing stupidity levels!
I always check the keyhole before undressing. :left: :right:
Not me. If they really wanna see that bad, they can have it. :left:
That quote isn't mine.
How in goodness sake can a court award $55,000,000 dollars?
So it's okay to give out personal info and be a creeper? Because this seems justified. The amount is based on what the company could pay but that wasn't awarded. The bigger the company the bigger the dollar amount. That big number has got plenty of attention and I'm not upset about that. She'll be lucky to get a tenth of that when it's all over and maybe the hotel will follow their own policy next time.
Plenty of examples, like your old crutch the McDonald's coffee lady, to make this point with and you picked one that doesn't really work. Nice.
Anything else you want to add to this thread? This is going so well. :)
America it's damn ridiculous. Either at suing or sewing, it doesn't matter.
That quote isn't mine.
Sure isn't. That was weird, fixed now.
:up:
Always the same ensbb3 when there is no sensible answer.......
That quote isn't mine.
Sure isn't. That was weird, fixed now.
You know Barulheira that, in America, you could make midnight raccoon to pay you ... many many millions just for that.
Don't accept his gentle and educated excuses, suit him for the big bucks. That's the real American entrepeneurship style. :)
Rjowie's thread touches the point about the schizophrenic American society and the way a rotten system of justice generates no justice but social conflict.
Years ago a person got a ten figure sum for her McDonald's coffee being too hot.
That never happened so far as I can determine. You should have provided a citation. What I found was a case where a woman sought $2,700,000 but didn't get it.
Liebeck didn’t actually get anywhere near that amount of money, at least as far as public record goes. The judge in the case reduced the punitive damages to $480,000, bringing the total judgement down to $640,000. Both sides appealed the decision, but their appeals were never heard as they agreed to an undisclosed settlement during mediation, thought to have been under $600,000.
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2015/07/truth-infamous-mcdonalds-hot-coffee-incident/ (http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2015/07/truth-infamous-mcdonalds-hot-coffee-incident/)
That never happened so far as I can determine. You should have provided a citation. What I found was a case where a woman sought $2,700,000 but didn't get it.
The famous case (which you're also referring to) is this one (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants).
The jury damages included $160,000[3] to cover medical expenses and compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive damages. The trial judge reduced the final verdict to $640,000, and the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided.
This blog post (http://overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban-legends-and-stella-liebeck-and-the-mcdonalds-coffee-case/) seeks to set the record straight on some false beliefs regarding the coffee case.
I have to say warning that coffee is hot sounds a lot like warning that peanut butter contains peanuts. It's interesting (sad?) that people apparently add spurious details like that the woman was driving (which she wasn't), but you have to wonder how this made it to court at all.
It's interesting (sad?) that people apparently add spurious details like that the woman was driving (which she wasn't), but you have to wonder how this made it to court at all.
Why would it being heard be a problem tho? Even knowing the outcome wasn't the same as what passed into urban legend we don't know all the how's and why's enough to pass any kind of judgement. These corporations play the villains in other threads. Well except the Apple vs FBI one. Suddenly
Apple is some kind of hero now. So maybe this has more to do with how it's covered than any real issues at all? Couldn't that be why it's as common as it is? People never hear the outcomes and assume that ridiculous thing happened.
Always the same ensbb3 when there is no sensible answer.
You may wanna get checked out, sir. Looks like you had a mild stroke with this one.
I -of course- agree with Howie on this one: A girl was filmed being naked! How could that happen? :)
She wants millions of dollars, because she was filmed? And she thinks the hotel should "protect" her from every miscreant and pervert…? (Where -in the contract for providing accommodations- does that clause appear?) The hotel got scammed, she got stalked…
Prosecute the stalker and the scammer.
I see no reason to blame the hotel.
And I'd add (even though I've not seen her naked) that the monetary value she places upon her "privacy" is not likely realistic!
Why would it being heard be a problem tho?
Spurious cases should be thrown out because otherwise the defendant has to waste time and money. Just about the only way in which I can construe 90°C coffee as too hot, for example, is if they offered to make new coffee because it's been sitting out for a while but the customer rejected the offer. You might then call this misleading because you wouldn't expect coffee to be kept at a freshly brewed temperature, but rather at 80°C or so (which isn't much cooler…). Another way in which McDonald's might be called negligent is if they used horrible plastic cups that can easily spill coffee when you squeeze them a little too tight or something. So I suppose it's a bit of a question of phrasing as well. For example,
if you use a certain type of cup, the coffee shouldn't be more than 60°C (which can still cause third-degree burns!). But the idea of coffee being served at 90°C in and of itself is normally not negligent, but expected of fresh coffee.
Unfortunately I can't seem to find the actual case files online (findlaw.com seems to be broken), but this link (http://abnormaluse.com/2011/01/stella-liebeck-mcdonalds-hot-coffee.html) is useful because it quotes a lot. It does allege that the "container … had design defects", but it doesn't specify in which way.
I see no reason to blame the hotel.
I can't be bothered to read up on it, but just because someone was scammed doesn't mean they weren't (somewhat) negligent in what they could've done to avoid being scammed. I think that in the relevant American legal language you could, for example, say that the scammer is 90% guilty and the hotel 10%.
And another point on the hotel. There has to be a limit as to what one can expect from such a business. Are they going to have people on every floor for example to walk about? The whole sum is utterly scandalous and there will be a very robust challenge and rightly so.
Spurious cases should be thrown out because otherwise the defendant has to waste time and money.
Naturally I agree. Especially in cases regarding individual's. But these are corporate cases. I'm sure there's enough evidence to support what the OP suggests but has failed to articulate. I'd even agree to an extent because of experience, tho, I reject the conclusions drawn from the OP's case and subsequent brain fart.
There's reasons you'd keep liability insurance and workman's compensation, but also adopt policies that reduce your liability in given circumstances. This is part of business. In the OP's case, that someone was able to find out she was staying at the hotel, and what room, then book the room beside her is directly due to negligence that by law the hotel is responsible for. The lady was after all under the impression that wasn't a thing that could happen. Turns out the lady is a mild celebrity too and 20m people have seen her naked, websites have monetized it and she's been forced to explain it wasn't intentional on tv. So may be the emotional consequences are extreme. Not like people stalking and killing celebs is a thing either, right? These are the clients the hotel serves so are liable regardless of the extreme. Just like McDonald's serves 70yo ladies and 5yo toddlers so I'd expect them to have policies that reduce their liability in service of those clients. like sturdy enough containers for a hot beverage. Sure it has passed into lore 22yrs later as a case of stupid shit that happens everyone knows coffee is hot. Some of it is based on inaccurate information and, like you, I can see where liability
could of been a thing if the container was at fault. So I disagree this corporate case wasn't worth hearing. And anyways now we get to see how these things are remembered, with nothing more than they settled as a ruling. In the OP's case we have a ruling by jury that supposedly could understand the emotional distress (probably mostly women). And they awarded more money than existed. But... it can be seen as a result of the extreme circumstances. So I'm not convinced this fits the case the OP is making. Personally I wouldn't care. I lack the modesty needed to worry who sees my junk. May be why my immediate judgments might not be relevant here like turns out in the McDonald's case.
There's plenty wrong with law firms advertising to sue corporations as well as corporations suing every time they want to bend laws to their will. And how these things are remembered has got to have a baring on how common private lawsuits are as well. Getting to that may work towards an answer of why it is as it is. Something the OP suggests he's after - but wouldn't hear any of. So far we've looked at two extreme examples spanning 22years from *different States.
*(Oh let's not get into that. (http://www.instituteforlegalreform.com/states))
There has to be a limit as to what one can expect from such a business.
I'd agree. But then you jump straight to ridiculous. How about start with not giving out personal information about guests? Had this guy found out she was there by roaming the halls and simply asked to be booked in a specific room for reasons unknown the hotel's liability would be nill.
Hhhm. Still does not go along with that utterly ridiculous decision of a court. The decision is morally wrong and head shaking.
Still does not go along with that utterly ridiculous decision of a court. The decision is morally wrong and head shaking.
Right that's what I've been saying, mate. You're just havin' a piss yea... Oh wait. You're not pointing out your contribution so far followed by a description of your general posting style, are you? Drat, you can see how that's confusing right?
See, I've positioned myself in opposition. And go...
Now smart mouths explain the suing stupidity levels!
Scots.
We learned it from them, then after we told 'em to screw off back to the UK, we've been aiming to perfect it ever since. :yes: :devil:
Civil procedure is a tangle of common law and rational procedure… The Common Law is -of course- an Anglo-Saxon remnant; following the Roman Empire's precedent.
As much as I like to disagree with RJ, in this case — well, I don't see either how the hotel was derelict in its duties or how the girlie being shown in the all-together warrants a multi-million dollar award…
As Howie asked (…he did, didn't he? :) ), have we all gone mad?!
Poor try Colonel. Oakdale is right on the madness regarding the sums?
Let me repeat myself, something I'm good at.
========
The lady will never see the $55 million. Even if Marriott has to pay $27 million, which is unlikely, her attorneys will get about 40% of it.
(T)he Nashville Marriott and the company that operates it responsible for a little less than $27 million. But Andrews won’t get that amount either.
The hotel’s legal team has not yet announced their plans, but Sanders says they will ask Davidson County Circuit Court Judge Hamilton Gayden to do one of three things — overturn the whole judgment, ask for a new trial or request a reduction in damages. “It’s very rare for a judge to overturn a case like this,” says Sanders. “He’d have to believe that the jury had lost its mind.”
Many legal experts predict that the case will end in a settlement before it goes to appeals court. “If I’m the defendant, I’d make my settlement push now, because the farther this case goes, the stronger the position of Andrews becomes,” says Sanders, noting that it’s unlikely that an appellate court that wasn’t present for the original proceedings would overturn the judgment.
And...
Sanders, who practices in the same county in which this case took place, was surprised at the judgment. “Davidson County juries have a reputation for being parsimonious,” he says. “I’m shocked at the amount. There have been people who have been killed because of negligence who’ve gotten a lot less than this.”
Actually I already knew that she would not get that full amount and was mentioned on a news item although what she will eventually get will still be damn ridiculous. Ah, Sanders now there is a voice of real reason.
Actually I already knew that she would not get that full amount and was mentioned on a news item although what she will eventually get will still be damn ridiculous. Ah, Sanders now there is a voice of real reason.
Keep us posted. I'd like to know how it turns out.
Sadly, Sanders' campaign is doomed. He'd never beat Trump.
Take your pick.
1) Hillary
2) Trump
3) (https://static-secure.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Politics/Pix/pictures/2012/1/10/1326200471603/Alex-Salmond-007.jpg)
I know, it's not easy.
Neither dear man. One is a maverick and clown and the other a lying, scheming and woman with a dishonesty. Even that photograph is a negative as he got smacked and resigned. Sanders was an almost revolutionary direction that too many over there hold their hands in horror about. Good he did so well but the time obviously isn't ripe yet for the wider grey cells to be matured!
If we become "Social Democrats,"
RJ, there will be nobody left to save your sorry butts… Unless of course you think Putin is your friend? :)
Sanders -like some others I could mention!- has suckled at the public teat for almost his entire life; so, his views on how society should be "organized" may be a tad-bit biased…
[…] the time obviously isn't ripe yet for the wider grey cells to be matured!
Yes: Senescence is the goal! :)
(But I can see why you're impatient for us to catch up!)
BTW: What do you think of "Hulk" Hogan's case…?
[Hogan's attorneys told jurors this is the core of the case:] "Gawker took a secretly recorded sex tape and put it on the Internet." And now they are paying for it, dearly. Also notable is that there doesn't seem to be anyone interested in defending them, as even the Twitter community (if it can truly be called that) has come out strongly in favor of the ruling against Gawker. Maybe they should have at least made more friends? They did make $6.5 million in net income in 2014 and their Wikipedia article states that they were last sold in 2009 for $300 million, so while they may not be put out of business, it seems likely they will at least be [changing] hands, and soon, with the jury ruling $55 million for economic injuries and $60 million for emotional distress. I think that's jury-speak for "body slam."
I'm just Joe Schmoe, so once again the sums involved seem excessive… :(
If Gawker should be put out of business, shouldn't there be some kind of "due process" involved? (But it seems that a great many people think "mob violence" is the same thing! Democracy, at it's finest!) "Hulk," baby (…I mean "cry baby… :) ), you're too old and pathetic for anyone to care — about who you
schtupped, or how well you did it.
The "awards" granted in such cases are egregious.
too old and pathetic for anyone to care
"He's rubber, you're glue; whatever you say to Rj bounces off him and sticks to you," sez Hulk Hogan.
And, yes, you're Joe Schmoe.
One is a maverick and clown and the other a lying, scheming and woman with a dishonesty.
I wonder why is that word inside such an evil context. :eyes:
And, yes, you're Joe Schmoe.
…:) If only I could believe your knew what you were saying! But you've often given me evidence that that's not one of your concerns…
Do you mean to denigrate me? Or to indicate that you would? Or that you sort-a speak Yiddish?
Or are you calling me an average Joe? (I can live with that; but I suspect you can't… :) )
If only I could believe your* knew what you were saying!
"Your"? Really!
Not knowing what I'm saying never stops me.
* Howieism
Oh crap! It's contagious…
Not knowing what I'm saying never stops me.
Does it stop any of us? ;)
Oh crap! It's contagious…
Creeping Howieisms. They'rr al overr the plase!
And much appreciated by those over here who appreciate me.
ps. Retired teacher note two rr's as you are quick enough to gripe at others. :whistle:
ps. Retired teacher note two rr's as you are quick enough to gripe at others. :whistle:
Is that
all you noticed…? :)
Creeping Howieisms. They'rr al overr the plase!
I was watching about there on the telly it's about the brained yanks mired in poverty over the pond and a loud-mouth corporate woman running for president. The announcer was even an RC and he noticed! The red socks have been kiping his native Ireland poor and inorant, but now he's sharp lad that can see it's American imperialism that causef Howieisms to creep because of that woman and Trump. I spoke about this with nun we went to the Chinese restaurant for fish and chips and Irn Bru. She was quite taken with me and will trade her red socks for orange even if the poor lass orderd General Taos Chicken in a Chinese place! A programme on teh telly told me the general was a good lowlander Scot and an Orangeman :)
Priceless!
Gotta agree, Barulheira! You nailed it, Sang!
Yes spot on for emphasising the brainless in the ex-colonies. Immature and emotional and with a system that stinks and politically a world joke with what is going on right now. Any time you lot are reminded of the glaring hypocrisy of the land that continually boats of how great it is. You are so propaganda based and so dumb you even have to have the flag everywhere including a classroom. Talk about over nationalism! Unable to defend by all means pump out the kindergarten stuff and proves my point. Thanks! :hat:
Has your nation yet learned to teach grade-school English? (Or are you the exception…? :) )
Sang captured the essence of your — what is it? Bad education or personal inadequacy? And -for you- that's yet another reason to rant and rave against the U.S.! :) Like Barulheira said: Priceless!
But, of course, you know we love you!
And -for you- that's yet another reason to rant and rave against the U.S.!
You're correct in this. What I'm interested in why he does this. Of course there are problems in the US, for instance squalid slums in Detroit and inexcusable lack of leadership that allowed this to happen. But those issues are not uniquely American and exist in the UK as well. If you recall, some years ago I pulled some up data about Glasgow and many of the negative statistics were remarkably similar to the American city and in some cases even worse*(although Glasgow does have far less homicide.) Given what we know about Howie, the conclusion that I draw is that he's resentful of America's position in the world, one formerly occupied by the British Empire. Sadly, ranting and raving about the US does nothing to improve his own country and will not bring his empire back.
*
(https://dndsanctuary.eu/imagecache.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.understandingglasgow.com%2Fassets%2F0002%2F8336%2FGlasgow_pop_1801_2014_textpage.png&hash=818d7ea937a7625845f3daa2a9f1b00a" rel="cached" data-hash="818d7ea937a7625845f3daa2a9f1b00a" data-warn="External image, click here to view original" data-url="http://www.understandingglasgow.com/assets/0002/8336/Glasgow_pop_1801_2014_textpage.png)
Although we see a slight uptick in population since 2001, the overall downward trajectory of Glasgow's population does not indicate a healthy city. Why did all those people leave? Was for the same reasons Detroit's shedding residents? Yet we don't see Howie expressing concern over the state of his city, only troubled American ones.
What I'm interested in [is] why he does this.
Me too. But over the years I've come to believe that neither his education nor his experience offers much by way of explanation. It's a matter of
personality…
Being quite an
asshole myself, I think I know what I'm talking about! :)
Brilliant. A very good example of the routine ignorance of ex-colonists. They pomp and show off as the greatest place ion earth but when the hard truth is faced they try to dodge it as such would make a mockery of the place. Glasgow did have a bigger population but it declined on a very good reason due to being overcrowded within the boundaries. What was totally ignored was that several new towns were built to deliberately reduce the population and were successful. All government doe and would not happen in the States. Instead you get towns going bankrupt and look at the Detroit disgrace or the city with poisoned water! Disgraceful. So the new towns did a great job of helping the population.
A typical attempt by those that like to be imperially boastful and always, always do a dance.
ps Oakdale do you note how threads change.......?
ps Oakdale do you note how threads change.......?
Yes: As a conversation would.
What you did in the "Replacing Scalia" thread was more like what children do when adults are talking… :)
Utter idiocy unfortunately dear hermit man as drifting was very much part of the way in Opera and that HAS continued in this set-up as fine you know it. Mind you it does help ex-colonists doing that..... :hat:
ion earth
Ion Earth? Interesting. I'll write a little dystopian story about "Ion Earth" ruled by weird orange overlord that worships a horse-riding genderqueer demigod. The ion version of Earth will be nightmare and it will be up to heroes from across a big lake flying a red, white and blue banner to free Ion Earth from the oppression. I'll want to read up on ions to see how their properties fit into the story :)
Ion Scotland somewhere? No ion sewing machines?
Nice tries by the resident smart alec mentality!
I had to look it up. It's "smart aleck".
I wonder why the appellation "dumb alec" never caught on? (I guess, because "dumb sh*t" was already becoming popular! :) )
But using just one source for idioms and their spelling can be misleading…
A smart aleck, also spelled smart alec, is someone whose sarcastic, wisecracking, or humorous manner is delivered in an offensive, obnoxious, or cocky way. Other closely related terms include know-it-all, smarty pants, wisenheimer, and wise guy.
(Wiki)
:)
I was quite right with the pronunciation Barulheira so the description suits you too dopey - smart alec.
(I guess, because "dumb sh*t" was already becoming popular! :) )
It's spelled "dumb shit". That's "shit" without an asterisk.
I don't even know how to pronounce sh*t.
I don't even know how to pronounce sh*t.
My guess is something like /ʃət/. :P
Lord Google produced this gem.
"I am curious whether there are any dialects left in England (probably North and North and East Midlands) where "shut" is still pronounced [ʃIt] rather than [ʃʌt] or [ʃʊt], i.e. where "shut the door" sounds like "shit the door".
Wondering...will DnD shit down any time soon?
Don't count on it.
(https://dndsanctuary.eu/imagecache.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wowfailblog.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F02%2Fphew.png&hash=cd780cee2cfb1d240450401c31efb174" rel="cached" data-hash="cd780cee2cfb1d240450401c31efb174" data-warn="External image, click here to view original" data-url="http://www.wowfailblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/phew.png)
I prefer the Scots word 'keech' and as a secondary issue is less of a foreign dominance of our language.......
Let me throw this in: Howie.if you can't get your dresses at a reasonable price, perhaps you should emigrate… :)
Very subtle and I have of course worked out that such is an admission of yourself but not my scene as I am a real man who gets out and about.
A woman is suing (http://www.inquisitr.com/3049678/woman-sues-starbucks-for-5-million-for-putting-too-much-ice-in-her-iced-coffee-drinks/) Starbucks for five million dollars. What did the coffee chain do? Put too much ice in her iced coffee. All you have to is ask them for light ice and they still put too much in, make the prepare you another one :faint:
[…] as a secondary issue is less of a foreign dominance of our language…
You have a language? :) Why don't you use it?
[…] but not my scene as I am a real man who gets out and about.
No,
RJ. You're still a little boy who thinks traipsing through the woods is the epitome of "manhood".
Never been a soldier; never for soldiers, either. Am I correct in assuming that you're a pacifist? If so, you've never really been any use to anybody… (Except as the government paid you to be.) But that's what you prefer: Ineffectuality!
Luckily, you've practiced for so long that you've got it down! Good for you.
But how is it good for anyone else…?
Oh, I forgot: Why would you care about anyone else…
I have a far deeper and public experience than you monk hermit. Been written about, interviewed on radio and met many famous people and all something you haven't done and in hardness beyond you. However I will refrain from misusing your envy and frustration. And maybe it is good for you that you are on these forums as outside with people you would probably clamm up, freeze and rush to get home so this makes you get a wee bit of confidence without being in a presence. Clever but obvious.....!
Your fantasy world obviously amuses you! Else you'd return to reality more often…
You're much like Donald Trump, shouting "Lyin' Ted" until most people -himself included- believes it! :) That pea rattling 'round in your head must make quite a racket…
Nice try. Trump makes your country look like a laughing stock and you know what? He would never get elected to anything here due to being a sensible democracy. :ko:
Nah! He's probably going to be your next Queen… :) (He like's to sue people, too. If I understand it correctly, saying something that's true can still be considered libel in your realm. Interesting! :) )
You are the champions on libel. Trump would get nowhere here and it is just as well your head shrinkers are in great numbers as they are needed.......
You apparently don't know your own country's laws and traditions. (Why am I not surprised? :) You have such a "wide" democracy that incoherence is almost guaranteed… But you, sir, bring the mindset with you!)
Truth is not a defense, in your country. Nor is it a requirement…
And certainly not your forte.
Haha. Coming from a country that has an eedjit like Trump running for Head of State you are part of the nutjobland influence! Not only is our national parliament far wider than yours but even in the 4 countries that make uf the UK AND even on city councils. You lot have never grown up politically. :happy:
So: You're okay with suing someone for libel, even if what is deemed libelous is true? :)
Sounds suspiciously like the "let's not offend the little snowflakes" version of Political Correctness to me. Which, of course, you're in favor of… :)
Usual ex-colonist sidestep on the matter of wider democracy. Just two is better than us? The actuality proves that daft.