In the case of libel, I believe it has to be published in England for you to sue there - but in today’s world, everything is published everywhere. There’s a UK edition of the New York Times, for example.
How embarassing for the chiros.
This is typical of the sort of “research” cited to support chiropractic manipulation for non-musculoskeletal conditions. There’ll be a handful of case reports or small poorly conducted trials, published in a chiro journal and forever after trumpeted as proof that the intervention works.
Thankfully, the legal climate in the U.S. is nowhere near as conducive to libel suit harassment as in Britain. That hasn’t stopped some chiros from using legal threats to try to silence critics. For instance, the World Chiropractic Alliance got into a sweat and issued dire threats after public transit ads appeared in Connecticut to call attention to injuries caused by chiropractic neck manipulation. The WCA’s leader, Terry Rondberg likened the ads to a hate crime:
- “This is like a hate crime committed against our profession,” said Rondberg. “The WCA won’t stand for it. We’re not going to allow these rabid anti-chiropractic groups to disguise their libel as ‘free speech.’ If they’re going to scream <I>fire<I> in a crowded theater, we’re going to hose them down for good.”
Rondberg likened the battle to the civil rights movement of the ‘60s.
“Selma, Alabama is where the civil rights movement began. It started with a single bus and the refusal by Rosa Parks to take a seat in the back of that bus,” he told an enthusiastic audience during the WCA Summit in Washington, DC…He added: “If those bus signs aren’t taken down immediately,the WCA is prepared to go to federal court and give them an adjustment they won’t forget! The WCA is ready to take on those allopathic skinheads and make this a national issue and the best-known bus ride since Rosa Parks.”* :rolleyes:
Band name!
The chiros may win this battle, but it may make them lose the war. Here’s hoping they burn. I feel bad for Singh however, he’s going to have a judgement to pay thanks to this crank of a judge.
Would go see.
Yes, and this is the really disturbing thing. Eady appears to be on something of a crusade at the moment, having set some really awful precedents in terms of when cases can be brought to UK courts and the extent to which defendants have to go to provide a defence. A similar case, from memory, involved the supermarket chain Tesco who sued individual journalists (rather than the newspaper) over stories which were proved to be true, but still defamatory…!
The political/satirist paper Private Eye has been documented this for the last few months but, as far as I know, the mainstream media has not yet had the courage to tackle this and bring it into wider public opinion (for obvious reasons, perhaps!). Maybe this case might well be the start.
But the problem here is more than just one asshole judge. It appears that he is probably working within the discretion the law allows him.
It’s the law that needs changing in the UK, and badly.
This sounds similar to a technique used by well-funded organizations (primarily large corporations) in the USA to harass or intimidate their critics: the SLAPP lawsuit (Strategic lawsuit against public participation - Wikipedia). Basically, this involves lawsuits against your critics until they are overwhelmed by the legal costs.
Several states & Canadian provinces have passed laws against SLAPP lawsuits, though it can be hard to prove that a lawsuit meets this definition.