Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: thundrey

I prefer the American way. The plaintiff is the one taking up the defendant’s time, money, and freedom with the lawsuit or criminal charge. It is only right that the burden of proof be on the plaintiff.


14 posted on 06/09/2008 5:12:42 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (To the liberal, there's no sacrifice too big for somebody else to make. --FReeper popdonnelly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

So how do you prove a negative? If you are the victim of a libellous campaign by a tabloid newspaper whose word is taken as gospel by hundreds of thousands of credulous morons nationwide, in which it was insinuated that you were a depraved nonce, how would you prove you weren’t? You can’t prove a negative. The newspaper should have to prove that you are what they say you are, not the other way around.
I appreciate you probably won’t give a s**t because you are probably not a celebrity or in the public eye and you consider it unlikely that you would ever be subject to unfounded but undisprovable allegations, but it can and does happen to other people, and despite Britain’s strict libel laws, we have some of the worst press outlets for trying their luck by printing dubious things about other people...


15 posted on 06/09/2008 6:21:49 AM PDT by thundrey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson