Tag Archives: libel

Rachel Riley libel appeal: attack of the trolls

While we wait for my Counsel to finish writing the grounds and skeleton argument for my appeal against the High Court judgment against me, let’s talk about the strange behaviour of some characters on the social media.

Be warned that some of what follows contains language you may find shocking.

I have to admit, I haven’t been paying much attention to what people have been tweeting in response to my articles about the judgment and my plans for an appeal, so the following came as quite a jolt, when I received it from a friend on November 30:

For those of you who may not be able to read the words in an image file, it contains a tweet from somebody who stated, on the day the judgment against me was published, “May I be the first to say, tough shit Siver, you snivelling little turd. And to all those mugs who donated towards the £233,830 fundraiser he siphoned from you gullible fools, tough shit to you all too. Have a really shitty day.” This was followed with six “thumbs-up” emojis.

Below it was a message from Twitter stating: “VIOLATION FOUND. We looked @[this person’s] account for breaking our abusive behavior rule. We found they broke ourabusive behavior rule through different reports we received about their behavior. They can’t Tweet, Retweet, or Like content, and we’ll ask them to remove the reported content if they want to regain full access to their account. Your safety is important to us.” And so on.

I understand there was quite a flurry of tweets similar to this in response to the judgment – and there have been a few saying similar or worse things after I announced my intention to appeal and started raising funds for it.

So, after I published my most recent update, “Appeal against Rachel Riley libel judgment set to be filed next week”, I decided to pay attention to the responses it received. I was ill (my fifth cold since the start of September) and had little better to do. And I didn’t have to wait long.

“Rejection of appeal to be reached the day after, still good grift, well played,” tweeted an anonymous Twitter user, seven minutes later. This person provided no name or identifying image, was following just 69 people and had only eight followers, and had joined Twitter that month.

Notice the use of the word “grift”, echoing Rachel Riley’s assertion that I am a “grifter”, which is defined as “a person who engages in petty or smale-scale swindling”. There is no truth in such an allegation, of course – so you can draw your own conclusions about this person’s reason for being anonymous.

It’s classic “troll” behaviour, of course – leaving an insulting or offensive message in order to upset someone, get attention or cause trouble.

I decided to engage this person in conversation: “Why are you trying to tell me what I do? It can only be because you are trying to fool other readers into believing your nasty little story.”

The response indicates a willingness to twist words to create a false impression: “I’ve … not told you what to do, simp.” A “simp” is defined as a “silly or foolish person” and the use of that word is further demonstration that this person is a troll – the use of insults being intended to provoke an emotional, and possibly foolish, reaction.

The conversation continued, with me pointing out: “You have a vested interest in broadcasting untruths. Are you being paid for this? If so, by whom?”

This seemed to incense the troll who had launched an attack purely to get an emotional reaction from me: “Ooooh, are you intimating there’s a CONSPIRACY, Mikey?”

“Not at all. Asking if an anonymous troll is being paid to cast shade on a fundraiser for justice seems perfectly reasonable,” I replied.

Funny how these trolls hate being called out on the reasons for their deliberately-offensive behaviour. It is a reasonable question: why else would a complete stranger join Twitter anonymously to attack an attempt to secure justice? What does such a person have to hide?

You see, they can’t claim they need to be anonymous for their own protection because it is they who are deliberately trying to cause provocation; to upset me and to put people off contributing to the fund supporting my appeal.

So, why hide behind a fake name? There has to be a reason. Am I right?

There’s really only one way to combat behaviour like this – and that is to win the case. And the only way to do that is by having enough funding to pay for an appeal. That is, after all, the only reason these trolls are attacking me – to discourage you.

So, please help me foil them by doing any or several of the following:

Make a donation via the CrowdJustice page. Keep donating regularly until you see the total pass the amount I need.

Email your friends, asking them to pledge to the CrowdJustice site.

Post a link to Facebook, asking readers to pledge.

On Twitter, tweet in support, quoting the address of the appeal.

Use other social media in the same way.

And don’t forget that if you’re having trouble, or simply don’t like donating via CrowdJustice, you can always donate direct to me via the Vox Political PayPal button, where it appears on that website. But please remember to include a message telling me it’s for the crowdfund!

Tomorrow I expect to see details of the appeal that my Counsel is writing, based on my own observations of the judgment and his expertise in law. No doubt its arrival will spur the trolls to new depths of absurdity.

Let’s give them a reason to think twice before they lower themselves further.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Appeal against Rachel Riley libel judgment set to be filed next week

Here’s some good news: the appeal against the High Court’s surprising judgment in favour of Rachel Riley in her libel case against me is set to be filed next week.

The flipside of that is, it will cost around £7,200 and the CrowdJustice fund currently has only about half of that amount. My solicitors reckon their costs will be similar. So we’re about a quarter of the way to our current goal.

This may seem a dishearteningly low amount but it isn’t.

All my legal advisers are committed to the case. They believe in it, and they are keen to do their best to turn it around.

All they need are the financial means to do it.

I would love to be able to provide some more examples of the way the judgment disregards and disrespects the facts of the case – but I am restrained by an injunction the judge imposed.

Having examined the judgment very carefully, though, it does seem clear that the judge has disregarded facts that should have been considered indisputable, in contravention of the demands of the Defamation Act 2013.

I look forward to seeing this explored in an appeal hearing – and that can only happen with your help. Please:

Make a donation via the CrowdJustice page. Keep donating regularly until you see the total pass the amount I need.

Email your friends, asking them to pledge to the CrowdJustice site.

Post a link to Facebook, asking readers to pledge.

On Twitter, tweet in support, quoting the address of the appeal.

Use other social media in the same way.

And don’t forget that if you’re having trouble, or simply don’t like donating via CrowdJustice, you can always donate direct to me via the Vox Political PayPal button, where it appears on that website. But please remember to include a message telling me it’s for the crowdfund!

I am aware that certain people on the social media are still attacking my fundraising events. One recently had their Twitter account frozen, due to the offensive way they attacked both my and you, my funders. I expect more such penalties will be imposed soon.

The only reason they are doing this is fear. They know the judgment is a dud and they know the only way of stopping it from being exposed is to prevent an appeal from happening.

You are the only ones who can foil them.

I’m sure you won’t let me down.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Will you support Mike’s libel appeal against Rachel Riley on this fact alone?

Royal Courts of Injustice: a failure of justice happened here, and it needs to be corrected. Critics with their own agenda are trying to prevent it. Don’t let yourself be persuaded by them.

There seems to be a certain amount of pushback on the social media, against my plan to appeal the judgment on Rachel Riley’s libel case against me.

People presenting themselves as legal experts are trying to put potential contributors to the CrowdJustice fund off helping out, relying on their own claims of expertise to cast doubt on my chances of success.

The problem with that is, these are people who have only read the judgment and have no knowledge of what my defence was. Therefore they have no understanding of how inaccurate the judgment was.

So today I thought I’d provide just one example of why this judgment was wrong and needs to be contested:

At one point, the judge claimed that my defence failed because I did not contact Ms Riley for comment before publishing my article – on three details that weren’t even mentioned in it.

Obviously there was no need to do any such thing. I can’t be responsible for libelling anyone on the basis of words that I did not publish. That’s the law and the judge in this case has ignored the law.

And that is just one error among many in the judgment on my case.

The injustice is absolutely staggering. If you are as outraged by it as I am – and as many right-thinking people already have been – please help me fight it.

I have a few thousand pounds left in the fund after the trial and the fundraising over the last week or so, but drafting appeal documents costs a considerable amount in itself, let alone actually going to an appeal hearing.

So please:

Make a donation via the CrowdJustice page. Keep donating regularly until you see the total pass the amount I need.

Email your friends, asking them to pledge to the CrowdJustice site.

Post a link to Facebook, asking readers to pledge.

On Twitter, tweet in support, quoting the address of the appeal.

Use other social media in the same way.

And don’t forget that if you’re having trouble, or simply don’t like donating via CrowdJustice, you can always donate direct to me via the Vox Political PayPal button, where it appears on that website. But please remember to include a message telling me it’s for the crowdfund!

I question the motives of the people who are criticising me on Twitter (and presumably elsewhere) for continuing to seek justice.

They seem to be supporters of Riley, and it seems clear that they fear what may happen if an appeal is submitted to the courts.

Once again, we face the possibility that an injustice will be inflicted on me, simply because I am not as rich as my opponent.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Appeal against Riley libel verdict is under way – but she has demanded £100,000 in legal costs

The Royal Courts of Justice: that could be a misnomer, as there was little justice to be seen in a High Court judge’s decision against Vox Political’s Mike.

Now Rachel Riley wants me to pay £100,000 to cover her legal costs – on top of the £50,000 in damages a High Court judge has already awarded her.

I haven’t got anything like that kind of money. I am an online journalist with no huge corporate machine behind me – and a carer for my disabled partner, not a millionaire TV celebrity.

And I would not willingly cough it up, even if I did have it. The judgment against me is a mess. The judge has cherry-picked pieces of evidence that she thought would support her decision instead of having regard to all the circumstances of the case – as the law required her to do.

None of her findings explain why it would not be reasonable for me to have believed that publishing my article was in the public interest. She just made bald statements that my conclusions were unreasonable and expected me to swallow them.

I decline.

I have spent the last week and a half analysing this dog’s dinner of a judgment and passing on my thoughts to my legal team. My Counsel is likely to start writing an appeal later this week, to be submitted to the Court of Appeal before the December 7 deadline.

It can’t happen at all without funding – and the more we get now, the more likely we’ll be to get it done.

Please help us make this last bid for sanity from the justice system by doing one or more of the following:

Make a donation via the CrowdJustice page. Keep donating regularly until you see the total pass the amount I need.

Email your friends, asking them to pledge to the CrowdJustice site.

Post a link to Facebook, asking readers to pledge.

On Twitter, tweet in support, quoting the address of the appeal.

Use other social media in the same way.

And don’t forget that if you’re having trouble, or simply don’t like donating via CrowdJustice, you can always donate direct to me via the Vox Political PayPal button, where it appears on that website. But please remember to include a message telling me it’s for the crowdfund!

Riley is also facing the prospect of a libel action over her ill-advised tweet suggesting that I had been dishonest in my fundraising because I had not mentioned her confidential offer of a settlement.

I’m working on putting together the cash for that by other means. It does arise from this case but I think the money raised here should be focused on the appeal.

I’ll keep you updated on both matters – and I hope the news will be good.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Should Mike sue Rachel Riley for libelling him last week?

I’m seriously considering what’s called a ‘Letter Before Action’ over this:

As I stated in my previous update, the numbers expert from Channel 4’s Countdown has got her numbers wrong. The offer was £1,000 to a children’s charity and £5,000 to cover her own legal costs (not court fees as she states here). Court fees were not mentioned in her solicitor’s letter of January 5 this year.

Secondly, that letter laid great stress on the point that the offer was confidential. As Riley has referred to the offer, I see no problem with quoting from the letter: “We wish to make it clear that this offer is made on a confidential basis. If your client chooses to  breach  that  confidence  then  the  offer  is  automatically  withdrawn.  That  should  not  be  construed as permission to breach confidence. We reserve the right to take action against any parties who choose to act in breach of confidence.”

The letter was also marked “without prejudice save as to costs” and so it would have been wrong for me to have referred to it in an open forum prior to judgment.

I don’t see why she should get away with this. Her tweet creates a false appearance that I was fundraising for my case dishonestly. I’ll try to fund the first shot in this matter myself and let you know how it goes.

The simple fact is that I believed I was right to defend myself in court against her.

I still do.

The judgment against me is a travesty. It seems clear that the judge has not correctly applied the Defamation Act 2013, which required her to have regard for all the circumstances of the case, rather than cherry-pick a few inconsequential details and ignore the rest.

If I were to be charitable, I might say it seems that she simply did not understand what happened in the events the trial discussed.

I have sent my thoughts on an appeal to my legal team and am awaiting their comments.

In the meantime, I must thank you all for your fantastic response to last week’s judgment and what I had to say about it. The CrowdJustice fund is nearly £2,000 richer because of it.

An appeal will cost much more than that, though.

We’ve been here before and know how much it will be. Not as much as the trial (thankfully), but still £20,000 or more. I’m awaiting a comment from my legals on the actual figures.

I reckon we can make it, though.

So, please:

Make a donation via the CrowdJustice page. Keep donating regularly until you see the total pass the amount I need.

Email your friends, asking them to pledge to the CrowdJustice site.

Post a link to Facebook, asking readers to pledge.

On Twitter, tweet in support, quoting the address of the appeal.

Use other social media in the same way.

And don’t forget that if you’re having trouble, or simply don’t like donating via CrowdJustice, you can always donate direct to me via the Vox Political PayPal button, where it appears on that website. But please remember to include a message telling me it’s for the crowdfund!

The judgment was a terrible shock but I always said the case was likely to go to appeal, one way or another.

Let’s make sure that can happen.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

The Riley libel case is NOT over – I’m planning an appeal

If you were dismayed to read that a High Court judge has handed down a verdict in favour of Rachel Riley, in her libel case against me, don’t be.

You’ll recall that I was defending my article about her as publication on a matter of public interest. For that to succeed, I had to prove that it was indeed on such a matter, that I honestly believed it to be on such a matter, and that my belief was reasonable.

The judge agreed that the first two conditions were met, but said the last condition was not.

Her reasons for saying this are not, in my opinion, rational.

So I’m likely to file an appeal before the December 7 deadline, on a point of law – that she failed to meet the requirements of the Defamation Act 2013 in forming her conclusions.

I cannot do this without funding, though.

My defence has always been a group effort. I would not have been able to get as far as I did without your help and, without it, I will not be able to go any further.

I notice some of you have already donated more money into the CrowdJustice fund and I am grateful – all the more so because we all have so much less disposable cash now, thanks to the blunders of our political so-called leaders.

So, once again, I have to ask, please:

Make a donation via the CrowdJustice page. Keep donating regularly until you see the total pass the amount I need.

Email your friends, asking them to pledge to the CrowdJustice site.

Post a link to Facebook, asking readers to pledge.

On Twitter, tweet in support, quoting the address of the appeal.

Use other social media in the same way.

And don’t forget that if you’re having trouble, or simply don’t like donating via CrowdJustice, you can always donate direct to me via the Vox Political PayPal button, where it appears on that website. But please remember to include a message telling me it’s for the crowdfund!

To give you just one reason why it is vital to make it as hard as possible for people like Riley to win, I notice that she has mentioned on Twitter a settlement offer she made some time ago:

 

There are a few problems with this:

Firstly, the numbers expert from Channel 4’s Countdown has got her numbers wrong. The offer was £1,000 to a children’s charity and £5,000 to cover her own legal costs (not court fees as she states here). Court fees were not mentioned in her solicitor’s letter of January 5 this year.

Secondly, that letter laid great stress on the point that the offer was confidential. As Riley has referred to the offer, I see no problem with quoting from the letter: “We wish to make it clear that this offer is made on a confidential basis. If your client chooses to  breach  that  confidence  then  the  offer  is  automatically  withdrawn.  That  should  not  be  construed as permission to breach confidence. We reserve the right to take action against any parties who choose to act in breach of confidence.”

The letter was also marked “without prejudice save as to costs” and so it would have been wrong for me to have referred to it in an open forum prior to judgment.

I invite you to draw your own conclusions about the honesty of Rachel Riley, in the light of these facts.

I would certainly hope that they provide encouragement to donate to the CrowdJustice fund once again.

I may have said this before, and if I did, let me assure you I mean it just as much now as I did then: Let’s make it all worthwhile.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Another social media site is being sued by big money. Can you help?

I know times are hard but it seems that money is trying to silence the facts again.

Here’s the video clip explaining what is going on:

Can you help?

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

#IPSO: toothless press regulator backs out of standards investigation into repeat libeller

A demand for action to stop a serial-libelling newspaper committing further offences has collapsed after the press regulator IPSO as good as admitted it won’t do its job.

The Jewish Chronicle has been found guilty of libel by the courts four times in the past three years – and was found by IPSO itself to have breached the Editors’ Code on accuracy no fewer than 33 times in the same period.

The Chronicle itself – including its editors and current owners – seems completely unperturbed by this evidence of prolonged wrongdoing.

As a news reporter of more than a quarter of a century’s standing, This Writer finds that amazing. If I had been found to have libelled anybody when I was working for the newspapers, my job would probably have been in danger, along with the paper’s future if the compensation award was large enough.

So I and a group of other JC libel victims led by former Labour councillor Jo Bird felt we had no option other than to appeal to press regulator IPSO for a standards investigation into the paper.

This would have meant that IPSO would consider whether the number and regularity of Editor’s Code breaches meant that the JC‘s editorial standards have fallen to an unacceptable level. If it were to find against the newspaper, then penalties – and measures to improve it – may be demanded.

IPSO’s board apparently discussed the matter and concluded that, because the JC is small and it has a new editor, an investigation would be disproportionate and unnecessary. Additional training will be enough, and the IPSO executive will review progress in six months.

Apparently, being small is now an excuse for bad journalism. I wonder if any of my colleagues in the left-wing social media will be allowed to offer the same excuse, if they are found to breach the law in similar ways.

As for the change of editor – how is this a guarantee of improvement? We know nothing about the newbie, who could be just as bad as Stephen Pollard’s record shows him to have been.

And of course all IPSO publishers are supposed to deliver training regularly to their staff as a matter of routine.

We are left with just one conclusion: that as a regulator of the UK press, IPSO is a sham.

As a member of the group that took action against the JC, I said today: “IPSO has refused to take meaningful action in the case of a member that repeatedly defies its authority, and it is clear that it will never do so. This sends the message to IPSO members that no behaviour by them could ever be bad enough to prompt even a formal investigation, let alone disciplinary action.

“We had pointed out to Lord Faulks that IPSO’s own conduct should also be subject to investigation. IPSO’s complaints committee publicly reported the Jewish Chronicle to IPSO’s standards department for ‘unacceptable ’conduct in November 2019, yet the paper’s spree of libels and code breaches was allowed to continue. This matter has been ignored.

“The price for this regulatory failure is felt by the public – both by those who are libelled and misrepresented and by readers who are fed falsehoods without consequence. That IPSO provided its response to us only after five months had elapsed underlines this disregard for the public. That it chose to do so at the height of the Christmas season smacks of the worst kind of news manipulation.

“The moral is clear: IPSO is nothing like a real regulator. It is a sham, a toothless organisation that always puts the interests of the press before those of ordinary people. If you have been abused in the papers, don’t count on IPSO to put it right.”

To this, I would add that it is clear the only way to gain proper redress against an IPSO-regulated newspaper that libels you is to take it to court and win a large amount of money in damages.

Yes, it is expensive. But my own experience in crowdfunding shows that members of the public are entirely willing to support their colleagues who have been wronged by people and organisations in positions of power and influence.

It can be done. And in the case of rags like the Jewish Chronicle, it should be – not just for the sake of those it has wronged, but for the sake of the facts.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Falsely-accused Wadsworth wins libel victory and substantial damages from Jewish Chronicle

Marc Wadsworth: a little justice at last for this dedicated anti-racism campaigner who has been falsely accused of anti-Semitism, repeatedly, since 2016.

The hard-right-wing Jewish Chronicle has been made to apologise and pay substantial damages to socialist campaigner Marc Wadsworth after it published very serious false allegations about him.

As someone who has also been libelled by the Wrongicle, dear reader, I’m sure you know I’ll have something to say about this!

Let’s have the details first, via the Morning Star:

The publication falsely accused Mr Wadsworth, in an article on its website in March, of being part of a group of current and ex-Labour members targeting Jewish activists in the party.

The High Court heard … that the JC article focused on allegations that a group of Labour members — including people said to have been suspended or expelled — were part of a plan to track down Jewish Labour activists at their homes to “take care” of them.

Dominic Garner, representing Mr Wadsworth, said his client was a civil rights campaigner, lecturer and author who had been wrongly associated with the group in the article.

He said: “The article named Mr Wadsworth in this context, as well as featuring a prominent photograph of him in its print edition, stating that Mr Wadsworth had given a speech at a launch event for the group — and in turn, alleging that he was both a member of the group and either involved or complicit in its activities.

“As the defendant has accepted, the allegations in the article about Mr Wadsworth were wholly untrue.

“In fact, Mr Wadsworth is not and has never been a member of the group to which the article referred.

“He neither spoke at nor attended the event in question, and has not been involved whatsoever in the group’s activities.”

Adelaide Lopez, representing the newspaper, said: “Jewish Chronicle Media Limited withdraws these false allegations and apologises to Mr Wadsworth.”

This is a welcome verdict in favour of a man who has spent years facing false accusations, ever since right-wing Labour cuckoo Ruth Smeeth lied that he was an anti-Semite after he said she was working “hand in hand” with the Daily Telegraph.

Smeeth went on to have Mr Wadsworth expelled from the Labour Party on the basis of this entirely false and baseless lie.

He has spent years trying to clear his name, as have many more of us.

The Wrongicle was among the papers that gleefully reported that This Writer was a Holocaust denier, after that article in The Sunday Times in February 2018.

Like all the others, it had to publish a correction – and did so, reluctantly, as you can tell from the surly wording – after I took a complaint to IPSO and it found in my favour.

But IPSO is toothless. It is merely a means to help papers avoid having to pay for their false accusations. I should have sued those papers for libel, as Mr Wadsworth has.

Source: Marc Wadsworth wins libel case against Jewish Chronicle | Morning Star

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Boris Johnson failed to pay £535 County Court-defined damages. Is he broke or not?

Wishful thinking: Boris Johnson won’t end up behind bars for failing to pay a County Court-ordered sum. But why does he think he can cancel it?

Confused? You should be.

Boris Johnson’s finances would befuddle even the most experienced double-entry jockey.

First we heard that being prime minister had made him so poor he couldn’t afford to feed himself and his many (known) children, and had appealed to Tory donors for help.

Then we discovered that this was against the rules, and suddenly Johnson announced that he had paid for everything after all.

But how can this be true, if he couldn’t even stump up £535 in accordance with a court order, back in October last year?

(By a curious coincidence, This Writer had to find exactly the same amount today – for repairs to my car. I managed it – and I earn a lot less than Boris Johnson, even though some – thanks, Mrs Mike – might say I’m worth a lot more.)

According to the BBC, the money is supposed to pay off libel damages – but I find that highly suspicious. Libel isn’t tried in the county court – cases only appear before High Court judges (I should know!) and they cost a lot more than £535!

Downing Street has said the court ruling is “without merit” (whatever that’s supposed to mean – if Johnson didn’t pay a court-ordered fine, then the facts seem fairly clear).

A spokesperson said,

“An application will be made for an order to set aside the default judgement, to strike out the claim and for a declaration that the claim is totally without merit.”

There was a time for that, and it was October last year. Now is too late.

It will be interesting to see what excuse is put forward for failing to challenge the judgement at the time.

I doubt any court will accept “The prime minister is above the law,” even if that is what Johnson genuinely believes.

Source: No 10 seeks to cancel county court debt judgement against Boris Johnson – BBC News

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook