NotW and Mosley (yes more) (11)

Thu 24 Jul 08, 12:13 PM
Silver_Ribbons
UK, 22 mths I think, quite simply alot of people here are missing a key point of what has been achieved here. The judge walks a very fine line on what could and could not be awarded. Stripping it down to basics - as I don't know much about law, I do know plenty about red tape and ripple affects to actions taken.
Consider: What does Mr Mosley need with excessive amounts of more money awarded to him for damages?
If the judge had awarded more funds, how many people would then step up to sue for invasion on this level just because of the money involved? It wouldn't prevent the papers from printing such.
It is a very subtle warning however that they overstepped their mark. Yes they will do it again, no doubt but....
What has happened here is a man with prominence and respected within his industry, indeed power not to be cowed has stepped up and said "This is wrong" There are so few out there that are willing - for what ever reason, - to stand up and be counted for what is right.
It is more than just "bdsm" its the right and wrong of it all. How many journalists have you come across with their private lifes all over a paper? Not really news is it?
I truly hope he's inspired some others to realise that just because a multi - national industry, or a giant super says XYZ doesn't mean it has to be so.
His summing up news snippet says just that too. In a statement he said: "I hope my case will help deter newspapers in the UK from pursuing this type of invasive and salacious journalism.
"I have learnt first hand how devastating an invasion of privacy can be and how readily papers like the News of the World will destroy lives in the knowledge that few of their victims will dare sue them.
"I want to encourage a change in that practice."
If they do it again there is a precedent in place now, thanks to Mr Mosley, that stands in its own way along side the various laws they are putting through at the moment.
Ask yourselves.. and be true.. had you found yourself in his position ( and no folks I don't mean the event that caused all this ) would you have complained - or taken action.
Imagine the reactions of loved ones, work colleagues, friends, the biddy in tescos looking for the whip, gag, cuffs in your shopping basket.
Its all well and good admiring him for the stand he's taken but would you follow in his footsteps?

24 Jul 08, 12:16 PM
Purvection
UK, 4 yrs
Read the judgment carefully. Justice Eady sets out very clearly why exemplary damages cannot be awarded in this case, based on previous case law.

24 Jul 08, 4:56 PM
Master_Craftsman
UK, 2 mths
Purvection wrote:
Read the judgment carefully. Justice Eady sets out very clearly why exemplary damages cannot be awarded in this case, based on previous case law.
If exemplary damages had been awarded, they would (almost certainly) have been reduced on appeal.

24 Jul 08, 7:50 PM
DarkLordDredd
UK, 6 yrs

Purvection wrote:
Read the judgment carefully. Justice Eady sets out very clearly why exemplary damages cannot be awarded in this case, based on previous case law.
Correct, but it would not ahve stopped him from doing so as there is no legal reason why he couldn't. Our office expert was ademant from the beginning that he wouldn't get exemplary damages, the actual quote was "Mosleys got more chance of marrying Lewis Hamilton"! Pretty much says it all.

24 Jul 08, 7:52 PM
Master_Craftsman
UK, 2 mths
DarkLordDredd wrote:

Purvection wrote:
Read the judgment carefully. Justice Eady sets out very clearly why exemplary damages cannot be awarded in this case, based on previous case law.
Correct, but it would not ahve stopped him from doing so as there is no legal reason why he couldn't. Our office expert was ademant from the beginning that he wouldn't get exemplary damages, the actual quote was "Mosleys got more chance of marrying Lewis Hamilton"! Pretty much says it all.
Does he want to do that?

24 Jul 08, 7:55 PM
Mac_rame
UK, 8 yrs

Silver_Ribbons wrote:
Its all well and good admiring him for the stand he's taken but would you follow in his footsteps?
Abserdamnedlutely, if I could afford it in the first place.
It wouldn't be lack of will it would be lack of cash that stopped me.
Wayne
Thank you for calling the Mental Health Line. If you are Obsessive-Compulsive please press 1 repeatedly. If you are Co-dependant please ask someone to press 2. If you have Multiple Personalities please press 3,4,5,and 6. If you are Paranoid-Delusional we know who you are and what you want. Stay on the line

24 Jul 08, 7:57 PM
spirifer
UK, 3 yrs

Silver_Ribbons wrote:
<snip> Ask yourselves.. and be true.. had you found yourself in his position ( and no folks I don't mean the event that caused all this ) would you have complained - or taken action.

To be fair, his reputation had already been dragged through the mud by the story being run in the first place. I don't think he had much option other than to sue.
And although I'm sure many of those outed would love to be able to have their day in court against the hypocrites that outed them, very, very few have the sort of money involved (�900,000 in total legal costs, some sources have said) in taking the likes of the NOTW on legally.
The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation - Pierre Trudeau
Doms - women will fancy you if they see you kicking the shit out of a weasel.

24 Jul 08, 10:49 PM
DarkLordDredd
UK, 6 yrs

Master_Craftsman wrote:

DarkLordDredd wrote:

Purvection wrote:
Read the judgment carefully. Justice Eady sets out very clearly why exemplary damages cannot be awarded in this case, based on previous case law.
Correct, but it would not ahve stopped him from doing so as there is no legal reason why he couldn't. Our office expert was ademant from the beginning that he wouldn't get exemplary damages, the actual quote was "Mosleys got more chance of marrying Lewis Hamilton"! Pretty much says it all.
Does he want to do that?
Could be a new angle to his kink?

26 Jul 08, 6:55 PM
Sorceror
UK, 5 yrs
Judging by the posts it is probably a relief that the NOTW did not decide to out every lawyer on IC. Hell, even at four a week, it would probably have been mid February 2009 before they could have had space to run an Abi Titmuss story...
S.....x.

26 Jul 08, 8:26 PM
DarkLordDredd
UK, 6 yrs

Sorceror wrote:
Judging by the posts it is probably a relief that the NOTW did not decide to out every lawyer on IC. Hell, even at four a week, it would probably have been mid February 2009 before they could have had space to run an Abi Titmuss story...
S.....x.

Last time the NoTW went after anyone legal they ended up in a major shit storm. As much as journalists hunt in packs, solicitors/baaristers tend to look after their own very well and its amazing how much information appears in plain brown A4 envelopes when problems arise. Methinks they'll be very wary of trying to uipset the legal profession.

26 Jul 08, 9:59 PM
Sorceror
UK, 5 yrs
But �850,000 (�910,000 total less the �60,000 that Max Mosely actually received himself) buys you a lot of friends. Cheers from m'learned friends then...
S.....x.

Next page


	©1997-2008 Informed Consent