Apology for Gordon Wilson

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby Cactusflower » Dec 6th, 2017, 4:01 pm

OldIslander wrote:
erinmore3775 wrote:While some here believe Gordon Wilson is a court time waster, Horgan and Ralston appear to have breached the BC Libel and Slander Act. Therefore, he has the right to sue for damages. Horgan and Ralston spoke without checking their fact, failed to check with their own Cabinet documents, and sought to make political hay with the firing of Gordon Wilson. Their apologies were too late and had no credence.

It's nice to read a thoughtfully written opinion, complete with source material.

Regarding Horgan & Ralston's libel, I don't believe there is a single poster in this thread who has argued that there was no libel.

Some here have suggested that this affair is a criminal matter -- utterly wrong. Only in very rare cases, where a person is intentionally going to great lengths, to severely harm the reputation of others, does "criminal libel" fit -- like this guy:

http://www.lawtimesnews.com/author/na/bayfield-man-faces-rare-criminal-libel-charge-9426/

Defamation actions are lawsuits launched in the Supreme Court. It is highly unlikely that Wilson's suit will ever see the light of day. First, as many other posters here have alleged, Horgan & Ralston didn't lie -- they believed at the time, what they said was true, based on bad information. Within hours of learning their info was bad, they formally and publicly apologized to Wilson. This does not forgive their defamation -- they should have checked their source info more carefully, or simply not said anything at all. But typically, an immediate public apology will greatly reduce the amount of damages awarded by the court.

What effect does an apology have?
A newspaper or a TV or radio station that publishes or broadcasts a libel can limit the amount of the damages they may have to pay by publishing or broadcasting an apology right away.


If this does go go court, Wilson will have to prove damage to his reputation. Horgan & Ralston's lawyers will have a field day with this, pointing out that he didn't do any real work in this patronage position -- there is public information out there, strongly suggesting this. Also that his reputation was terrible before the libel, and that Horgan & Ralston's comments didn't really cause any further damage to it, than Wilson has caused himself over the years.

There will likely be a small quiet settlement out of court, and that will be the end of it.

(I am non-partisan, in that I disdain most politicians equally, whatever their proclivities...)


This comment should have put the matter to rest once and for all. However, there are still those who have such an extreme hatred for the BC NDP that they will continue to vilify them long after the outcome of this lawsuit has been decided.

maryjane48 likes this post.
Cactusflower
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3595
Likes: 1716 posts
Liked in: 750 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 11:33 pm

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby seewood » Dec 6th, 2017, 4:09 pm

Cactusflower wrote:However, there are still those who have such an extreme hatred for the BC NDP that they will continue to vilify them long after the outcome of this lawsuit has been decided.


Yeup, pretty much nailed it. I'd be embarrassed to be associated with this lot of NDG's.
I am not wealthy but I am rich
seewood
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 993
Likes: 2065 posts
Liked in: 1022 posts
Joined: May 29th, 2013, 2:08 pm

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby maryjane48 » Dec 6th, 2017, 4:51 pm

Wilson and his,wife were sued for defamtion seewood .

http://www.timescolonist.com/news/b-c/f ... 1.21607157


Lets get real

Cactusflower likes this post.
User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 17124
Likes: 10586 posts
Liked in: 2666 posts
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 7:58 pm

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby Urban Cowboy » Dec 6th, 2017, 5:04 pm

erinmore3775 wrote:While some here believe Gordon Wilson is a court time waster, Horgan and Ralston appear to have breached the BC Libel and Slander Act. Therefore, he has the right to sue for damages. Horgan and Ralston spoke without checking their fact, failed to check with their own Cabinet documents, and sought to make political hay with the firing of Gordon Wilson. Their apologies were too late and had no credence.


OldIslander wrote:It's nice to read a thoughtfully written opinion, complete with source material.

Regarding Horgan & Ralston's libel, I don't believe there is a single poster in this thread who has argued that there was no libel.

Some here have suggested that this affair is a criminal matter -- utterly wrong. Only in very rare cases, where a person is intentionally going to great lengths, to severely harm the reputation of others, does "criminal libel" fit -- like this guy:

http://www.lawtimesnews.com/author/na/bayfield-man-faces-rare-criminal-libel-charge-9426/

Defamation actions are lawsuits launched in the Supreme Court. It is highly unlikely that Wilson's suit will ever see the light of day. First, as many other posters here have alleged, Horgan & Ralston didn't lie -- they believed at the time, what they said was true, based on bad information. Within hours of learning their info was bad, they formally and publicly apologized to Wilson. This does not forgive their defamation -- they should have checked their source info more carefully, or simply not said anything at all. But typically, an immediate public apology will greatly reduce the amount of damages awarded by the court.

What effect does an apology have?
A newspaper or a TV or radio station that publishes or broadcasts a libel can limit the amount of the damages they may have to pay by publishing or broadcasting an apology right away.


If this does go go court, Wilson will have to prove damage to his reputation. Horgan & Ralston's lawyers will have a field day with this, pointing out that he didn't do any real work in this patronage position -- there is public information out there, strongly suggesting this. Also that his reputation was terrible before the libel, and that Horgan & Ralston's comments didn't really cause any further damage to it, than Wilson has caused himself over the years.

There will likely be a small quiet settlement out of court, and that will be the end of it.

(I am non-partisan, in that I disdain most politicians equally, whatever their proclivities...)


Cactusflower wrote:This comment should have put the matter to rest once and for all. However, there are still those who have such an extreme hatred for the BC NDP that they will continue to vilify them long after the outcome of this lawsuit has been decided.


You don't happen to notice anything hypocritical by chance, when comparing your statement (in bold), to that of the anti Liberal gangs conduct, you included?

What's the deal with you guys anyway, decorum only applies when it involves the NDP????? Nice try! [icon_lol2.gif]
"Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig."
- Robert A. Heinlein

4 people like this post.
User avatar
Urban Cowboy
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3837
Likes: 3696 posts
Liked in: 5586 posts
Joined: Apr 27th, 2013, 3:47 pm

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby The Green Barbarian » Dec 6th, 2017, 5:07 pm

Cactusflower wrote:This comment should have put the matter to rest once and for all. However, there are still those who have such an extreme hatred for the BC NDP that they will continue to vilify them long after the outcome of this lawsuit has been decided.


And rightly so. Horgan ran his fat stupid mouth and now guess who has to pay for it??!!! And no one is supposed to be upset about that?? That's just ridiculous!
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
- Winston Churchill

Who's Dimples? Who's the MP for Kelowna? Both interesting questions that are hard to answer.

5 people like this post.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 28190
Likes: 12245 posts
Liked in: 16186 posts
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby Cactusflower » Dec 6th, 2017, 8:25 pm

*removed*
Last edited by ferri on Dec 7th, 2017, 6:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Off topic
Cactusflower
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3595
Likes: 1716 posts
Liked in: 750 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 11:33 pm

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby Veovis » Dec 6th, 2017, 11:12 pm

*removed*
Last edited by ferri on Dec 7th, 2017, 6:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Off topic
Veovis
Guru
 
Posts: 5828
Likes: 879 posts
Liked in: 4104 posts
Joined: Apr 19th, 2007, 3:11 pm

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby maryjane48 » Dec 7th, 2017, 12:51 am

*removed*
Last edited by ferri on Dec 7th, 2017, 9:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Off topic
User avatar
maryjane48
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 17124
Likes: 10586 posts
Liked in: 2666 posts
Joined: May 28th, 2010, 7:58 pm

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby Cactusflower » Dec 7th, 2017, 12:53 am

*removed*
Last edited by ferri on Dec 7th, 2017, 6:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Off topic
Cactusflower
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3595
Likes: 1716 posts
Liked in: 750 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 11:33 pm

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby Cactusflower » Dec 7th, 2017, 10:13 am

OldIslander wrote:
Regarding Horgan & Ralston's libel, I don't believe there is a single poster in this thread who has argued that there was no libel.

Some here have suggested that this affair is a criminal matter -- utterly wrong. Only in very rare cases, where a person is intentionally going to great lengths, to severely harm the reputation of others, does "criminal libel" fit -- like this guy:

http://www.lawtimesnews.com/author/na/bayfield-man-faces-rare-criminal-libel-charge-9426/

Defamation actions are lawsuits launched in the Supreme Court. It is highly unlikely that Wilson's suit will ever see the light of day. First, as many other posters here have alleged, Horgan & Ralston didn't lie -- they believed at the time, what they said was true, based on bad information. Within hours of learning their info was bad, they formally and publicly apologized to Wilson. This does not forgive their defamation -- they should have checked their source info more carefully, or simply not said anything at all. But typically, an immediate public apology will greatly reduce the amount of damages awarded by the court.

What effect does an apology have?
A newspaper or a TV or radio station that publishes or broadcasts a libel can limit the amount of the damages they may have to pay by publishing or broadcasting an apology right away.


If this does go go court, Wilson will have to prove damage to his reputation. Horgan & Ralston's lawyers will have a field day with this, pointing out that he didn't do any real work in this patronage position -- there is public information out there, strongly suggesting this. Also that his reputation was terrible before the libel, and that Horgan & Ralston's comments didn't really cause any further damage to it, than Wilson has caused himself over the years.

There will likely be a small quiet settlement out of court, and that will be the end of it.

(I am non-partisan, in that I disdain most politicians equally, whatever their proclivities...)


This comment bears repeating.
Cactusflower
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3595
Likes: 1716 posts
Liked in: 750 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 11:33 pm

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby LordEd » Dec 7th, 2017, 11:48 am

It does. This part is interesting.

Horgan & Ralston's lawyers will have a field day with this, pointing out that he didn't do any real work in this patronage position -- there is public information out there, strongly suggesting this.
If this is true, then its a defense. However, he apologized quickly, implying it was not true.

The public/high profile statement by Horgan may have fed the untrue statement, amplifying its effect and damage.
LordEd
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3712
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 2214 posts
Joined: Apr 3rd, 2008, 9:22 am

Re: Apology for Gordon Wilson

Postby Cactusflower » Dec 7th, 2017, 12:48 pm

LordEd wrote:It does. This part is interesting.

Horgan & Ralston's lawyers will have a field day with this, pointing out that he didn't do any real work in this patronage position -- there is public information out there, strongly suggesting this.
If this is true, then its a defense. However, he apologized quickly, implying it was not true.

The public/high profile statement by Horgan may have fed the untrue statement, amplifying its effect and damage.


That's the least interesting part. The most interesting part comes nearer the end of the comment. Anyone who as lived in B.C. for a few decades knows Gordon Wilson's history. Those who don't are the ones defending him.
Cactusflower
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3595
Likes: 1716 posts
Liked in: 750 posts
Joined: Aug 27th, 2017, 11:33 pm

Previous

Return to B.C.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests