Brawl victim wants compo from Dane Swan and co

[Kirby]

As for the rest of your points, you're putting the cart before the horse. Channel 7 only had to pay up because the original description of the lawyer itself was defammatory. By publishing it, Channel 7 were liable.

But if a defence operates so that the original statement is not considered defammatory, the person who then publishes it can't be liable because all they did is publish a statement, not a defammatory statement.

The reason defammation law has been scaled back to far is to preserve the right to free speech. It's probably gone a little far because the above defence can operate to protect the most outrageous opinions as long as the person can show they honestly believe them.

But hey, we live in a democracy and free speech is important.

As i said, they have only quoted the word "cowardly" and there is no quote about James accusing Swan of knocking him out. It may be that he said it but that's not the way it's printed. I'm suggesting some creative licence was used.

 

[bradrowe#32]

I hope the courts kick it out on it's head.

"Sorry you can't bring that lawsuit, not in those shoes!"

Well played sir.

 

[Canyouhearthedrums]

Well, at least we are getting closer to the point.

I never said it was the use of the word "cowardly" which was taken from a quote from James I indicated there was a possible case based upon the coupling of that description with a clear insinuation that it was Swan that knocked him out, thus creating the impression that in some cowardly act it was Swan who knocked him out and not one of the others.

I might remind you that we where only ever discussing the possibilty that he may have a case not that he would actually proceed with it.

Sure, my posts have just been my opinion on how the courts would view it, I may well be wrong.

If Swan wasn't involved in the attack or had tried to stop it or something, I think you'd be right on the money. But I thought it was accepted that Swan was involved in the attack? If I'm wrong about that, then you may well have a point re creative interpretation.

 

[Brad Goodman]

Read again...I said good average. I'll even go as far as good to very good average footballer.

Still a cog, not a piston, definitely not a captain.

Your knowledge of defamation law far exceeds your knowledge of football.

 

[Kirby]

Sure, my posts have just been my opinion on how the courts would view it, I may well be wrong.

If Swan wasn't involved in the attack or had tried to stop it or something, I think you'd be right on the money. But I thought it was accepted that Swan was involved in the attack? If I'm wrong about that, then you may well have a point re creative interpretation.

No, you are right in that he was involved in the attack but my recollection was that he was like the third man in and was involved to a lesser degree than the other two. He was found guilty of affray but not assault. I certainly don't recall (and I stand to be corrected) that there was any suggestion or finding that Swan knocked the guy out. I suppose the paper could argue that as part of a "group" he was responsible for the fellow being KO'd, but that not what the paper implies in the article i suggest.

This is all likely to be a moot point anyway because I'm sure Swanny would like it to all just go away.

 

[Kirby]

Sorry I was wrong.....

I'm not sure, but I have no idea how Crimes Compensation works as the criminal lawyers usually take care of these applications. However, I cant find any record of any civil proceedings issued in the County Court of Melbourne since 2004 by Jesse james.

You can go to the County Court website and click on the "Court Connect" button and do a search under his name. I can't find anything.http://cjep.justice.vic.gov.au/pls/p100/ck_public_qry_cpty.cp_personcase_details_idx

 

[tess]

I'm not sure, but I have no idea how Crimes Compensation works as the criminal lawyers usually take care of these applications. However, I cant find any record of any civil proceedings issued in the County Court of Melbourne since 2004 by Jesse james.

You can go to the County Court website and click on the "Court Connect" button and do a search under his name. I can't find anything.http://cjep.justice.vic.gov.au/pls/p100/ck_public_qry_cpty.cp_personcase_details_idx

Thats why I assumed it was VOC compensation but re-reading the article it says this ..

He is seeking more than $50,000 compensation from the trio.


"All three struck me ... all three people were striking me while I was on the ground.

Swan, Carey and Ramsay were not in court today for the application before Judge John Barnett.

There is nothing about VOC in the article at all, that's why I figured I must have been wrong.

 

[Chase the Ace]

Yeah wrong, but you should have added, 'again' or 'still'

 

[Pie eyed]

Is this guys name really Jesse James or did he change it by deed poll?

What is this country coming to?

Either fruitcake parents or fruitcake bouncer wanna be's.


Just his name deserves attention from a court.

 

[tess]

Yeah wrong, but you should have added, 'again' or 'still'

Harry I can admit when I am wrong, and in this case I was as I didn't read the story properly.

So many others have posted in this thread and you once again showed your total devotion to anything I post. It's nice in a scary stalkerish kinda way. Maybe you should try buying me dinner and a drink or two, that would work better than what you've been doing to be honest.

 

[Chase the Ace]

"Please someone help me, I'm just a poor victim"

And on and on it goes

 

[sunnyTEE]

That bloke needs to drink some cement.