Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 06:51:17 11/28/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 27, 2003 at 23:40:16, Russell Reagan wrote: >On November 27, 2003 at 23:22:42, Arturo Ochoa wrote: > >>However, if you want to continue involving Vincent Diepeveen in the List Case >>without **** any proof ****, how can I call you? Slander.... Libel ..... > >You make the common mistake of misunderstanding what slander and libel are. > >Unless you can show the false statements that people are saying, there is no >slander or libel here. If I say, "I think it is likely that Vincent did it," >that is not slander or libel. If I say, "I have first hand knowledge that >Vincent intentionally fabricated evidence to mislead the ICGA to get List >disqualified," AND you can prove that I am lying, AND you can prove that my >intent in saying that was to cause damage to the reputation of Vincent, then it >is possible that there is slander or libel. Unless actual damages can be proven, or a jury convinced that actual damages occurred, then it is all academic. One can receive compensation in a Civil Court of Law only if there are damages. The jury has to decide the amount of the damages before compensation is determined. IMHO. Bob D.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.