This that.
Ford knows that Dale was not in his backyard, he knows that he didn't take any photos of his kids, yet he clearly lies and claims that Dale did these things.
Ford finally faces legal action.
- Thread starter Cobalt_Kid
- Start date
Ford knows that Dale was not in his backyard, he knows that he didn't take any photos of his kids, yet he clearly lies and claims that Dale did these things.
Yes, Ford knows that, but he's still allowed to offer his own opinions of the event in an off the cuff interview.
What he inferred should make for some interesting legal babble. I can't wait.
BTW Goob's, ruffy has already convicted Ford of libel, and other criminal acts, so you're barking up the wrong tree if you're looking for objectivity.
What he said was not an opinion. Saying that he was in his back yard taking pictures of his kids is not an opinion.
It has already been proven in the police investigation that that never happened. They have surveillance footage of the back fence from that evening.
Luckily these things are very well documented these days so the backlash that he has faced is easy to demonstrate.
Again, the Ford's have surveillance cameras. They did not show this happening in any way.
Regardless, you are not even using his words any more. What you are saying is not what he said in the interview.
Dale dropped his camera and the Fords looked through it before returning it.
The Ford's have surveillance cameras that show the back of the property. It is very clear that Dale was never in their backyard.
Saying he was in his backyard taking pictures of his kids is not an opinion.
Settle down dude, you're gunna stroke out.
Look, I get it, you've convicted Ford across the board, you're obsessed, you're a hack, whatever, get over it.
My opinion is, Dale has a pretty good challenge ahead of him, and that's based on being a plaintiff in a stronger case.
Look, I get it, you've convicted Ford across the board, you're obsessed, you're a hack, whatever, get over it.
My opinion is, Dale has a pretty good challenge ahead of him, and that's based on being a plaintiff in a stronger case.
Lol, same old same old. As soon as you are challenged, you just resort to personal attacks.
Quite similar to another person we are talking about here.
Dude, you've made up your own libelous nonsense about Ford. This isn't a conversation I'm willing to waste time on, other than to either annoy or mock you. You aren't objective.
Your hate for Ford shines through.
And no, you haven't challenged me, I know what happened, I know what he said, I know what libel and slander cases look like. I wish dale all the luck.
All you're doing is parroting the same stupid stuff over and over for some reason. I didn't say anything you said wasn't true other than what remains to be proven. So I can only gather that you're to emotional about the topic to be objective.
Thus we come full circle, you aren't worth anymore of my time, than pure entertainment.
Grow up, get a life, smoke a joint, have a drink, turn off the puter and go get some fresh air, whatever it takes to clear the anger from your head.
Does not compute. You accuse me of libel yet claim you never said anything that I said wasn't true?
If people are going to parrot the same incorrect information, then necessarily they are going to get the same corrections each time.
You are just inferring what you want to infer about my emotions regarding this because it helps with your personal attacks. Simply stating the facts is not an emotional thing. I even threw in a little "lol" for you last time to help you out.
I have made very simple and easily verified statements. If there was any argument against them, I know you would have responded with that. If you time is so valuable, clearly you would do that rather than waste time with pointless personal attacks.
Media Malpractice: "With the full support of the Star, I will stay on the city hall beat while pursuing this action."
Fabulous. :lol:
Fabulous. :lol:
So you are accusing me of some special kind of libel that doesn't involve saying things that are not true?
Lol, I'm starting to think that your grasp of what libel is is about as tenuous of your understanding of the constitution as demonstrated in other threads.
The reporter has every right to stay on the beat in this case.
When politician get to suing each other they don't stop being
MP's or MLA's while they are in litigation against another
member of the house.
As for the BC story don't be too sure, the Furlong story is over
there is a long way between the filing of a suit and what might
come out of the closet before the end of it. Besides once someone
starts a court action things can appear out of nowhere.
When politician get to suing each other they don't stop being
MP's or MLA's while they are in litigation against another
member of the house.
As for the BC story don't be too sure, the Furlong story is over
there is a long way between the filing of a suit and what might
come out of the closet before the end of it. Besides once someone
starts a court action things can appear out of nowhere.
It would be a pretty bad precedent for Ford if he found out that he could get rid of any reporter that he thinks is too hard on him just be tossing a bit of libel their way.
Dale is a strong journalist with tons of experience on this beat. It isn't like Mayor McMoneybags has offered to do anything close to stepping away from his role while the countless messes that he has made make it impossible for him to do his job properly.
So much for any financial damages, lol.
Well for one, that his professional reputation has been damaged.
That just got tossed...
Which would leave special damages, good luck, Canadian courts aren't big on big numbers, even if Ford does lose.
That at the time of the incident, what he sated is what he believed.
Regardless of what ruffy thinks, the law here is tricky as hell, and Dale has a huge battle ahead of him.
LOL, you go right on thinking the law is black and white and what you read in the papers is how this case will be fought and won.
It makes one of us look like a fool, I'm sure I know who you think that is, lol.
The quote is about you claiming that I made libelous comments and claiming that you never said anything that I said wasn't true. Can you explain how that makes sense?
Some countries are like that-of course since the usual suspects here have never left the double wide they wouldn't know.
Are you really so daft that you think this is the first time you've discussed Ford on this forum?
I understand how your obsession has impaired your ability to think critically, but wow dude.
Flossy, Mhz, EAO live in a double wide?
Even if that was a valid defense, there is so much evidence that he knows that what he said isn't true.
In his last case, he argued that what he said was his opinion and that it was only libel unless the primary intent was to hurt the owner of the Boardwalk Cafe.
That is going to be a problem for him this time since he made numerous statements of fact, not opinion, and what other possible purpose could there be for the comments other than to hurt Dale?
The Judge also mentioned that they could not establish that the comments were directed at the owner of the Boardwalk Cafe. In this case, he explicitly mentions Dale by name.
He also said that they did not establish that what he said was defamatory. I don't know how he is going to argue that lying about him being on his property taking pictures of his kids and clearly using that as grounds to suggest that there is something wrong with him isn't defamatory.
Why do you argue law when you haven't a clue about it?
Did you watch to many episodes of Law & Order?
On a funnier note, I see you finally figured out that this isn't the first time you've obsessed about Ford.
I'm not surprised you would take the cowardly way out by just moving on.
Lol, nobody claimed that or made any claim like it.
The simple expectation is that if you are going to respond to my posts, you are actually going to respond to my post. Right now you are just hurling personal attacks and refusing to respond to anything of substance.