If jurisdiction landed in the UK, then I believe that would work in syphilis's favor: "Under American libel law, a public figure who claims to have been libelled must prove that the statements in question are defamatory, that they are false, and that they were made with actual malice. Furthermore, reliance on reliable sources (even if they prove false) is a valid defence. In contrast, English libel law requires only that the claimant show that the statements are defamatory. The burden of proof falls on the defendant to prove that the statements were substantially true, and reliance on sources is irrelevant".
Source: Irving v Penguin Books and Lipstadt. Note that that court case deals with denying certain horrific events occurred during WWII.
Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks
My deviantART gallery
Re^2: brightcloud.com - for those who like a touch of venom with their snake oil
Replies are listed 'Best First'.
|Re^3: brightcloud.com - for those who like a touch of venom with their snake oil|
by davido (Archbishop) on Aug 14, 2013 at 00:07 UTC
by Argel (Prior) on Aug 14, 2013 at 00:29 UTC