His honest opinion? Yes 100%
He clearly suggested that they are rapists but got away with it because of privilege /class/whatever.
If he was tweeting as a political representative etc that may be be significant.
Is honest opinion a defence to defamation?
You can have whatever opinions you like. Publishing them is a different matter
Some time back a prominent poster, lets call him @caoimhaoin, stated that the complainant was only in it for the money.
Presumably this now applies to Mr. Jackson?
1 Like
He didnāt publish an opinion tho.
Possibly, but a more sensible view might be that heās in it to protect himself against such attacks.
1 Like
Another view is that he might need the money if a mistrial is called due to the foreperson of the juryās phone and computer being examined and them being found to have done their own research on the trial as it progressed, against the orders of the judge.
No chance is this being tried again.
In the words of a learned man, an āappalling vistaā has been opened up.
Youāve made a big enough muppet of yourself without equating the cases.
Dont be silly
1 Like
Oh, defending the jury foreperson blabbing about the case on the internet within hours after being specifically instructed not to do so?
Whatever happened to respect for the justice system?
I would suggest that the chances of that juror not having done their own research during the trial are pretty slim.
It would appear the biggest ignorance and idiocy of all during this trial has come from within the jury itself, which is pretty staggering.
I was very surprised at the speed of the jury outcome.
I read the screenshots of the jurorās comments.
She said they had been effectively deliberating for over a week.
She sort of made it sound like they didnāt pay full attention to the closing statements.
I was absolutely astonished to read the following from the juror in relation to the complainant: āMummy and Daddy live in South Belfast in a million pound houseā.
Not only does it give clues to the complainantās identity, but it shows a flippant and dismissive attitude towards her based on her social class.
Which is tremendously ironic given the commentary weāve heard over the last couple of days.
Seriously, you couldnāt make this shit up.
Itās all open to interpretation tho Sid.
In relation to Jacksonās action against OāRiordainās tweet, thereās another irony - Jacksonās lawyer himself said the following:
āWe say that it was his status as a famous sportsman that drove the decision to prosecute in the first place."
So, while on the one hand Jackson is fuming at OāRiordain supposedly appearing to call the judicial process into question based on questions of status, Jackson and his lawyer are themselves calling into question the judicial process based on questions of status.
Iām not sure if they see the irony, but itās a bit rich, which is exactly what Mr. Jackson is now aiming to become by getting handouts from the courts.
Iām not entirely sureā¦ what you mean