Andrew Weaver vs Tim Ball - libel case dismissed

rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Andrew Weaver vs Tim Ball - libel case dismissed

Post by rustled »

Quelle suprise, the CBC's report takes the same tack as the Times Colonist:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.4536096
Funny how they, too, choose to print the negative stuff about Ball's piece, while ignoring the less-than-flattering stuff Skolrood said about Weaver.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 84759
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: Andrew Weaver vs Tim Ball - libel case dismissed

Post by The Green Barbarian »

rustled wrote:Quelle suprise, the CBC's report takes the same tack as the Times Colonist:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.4536096
Funny how they, too, choose to print the negative stuff about Ball's piece, while ignoring the less-than-flattering stuff Skolrood said about Weaver.


I know that you are being sarcastic Rustled, but what else did you expect. The left media has to keep the lie going about the man-made climate change myth, and so any news wherein a doomsayer in the Church of Global Warming, aka Dr. Bonehead Weaver, is made to look stupid, must be spun in the best way possible to protect the Church. I am shocked that any media outlet is bothering to even bring this story up, but not shocked that the ones that are doing so are doing all they can to keep the myth and the scam about AGW going.
"The woke narcissists who make up the progressive left are characterized by an absolute lack of such conscience, but are experts at exploiting its presence in others." - Jordan Peterson
flamingfingers
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 21665
Joined: Jul 9th, 2005, 8:56 am

Re: Andrew Weaver vs Tim Ball - libel case dismissed

Post by flamingfingers »

What was derogatory that Skolrood said about Weaver??

The article was deleted four days later and was followed by a retraction and apology.


The judge agreed, but also found the text to be "rife with error and inaccuracies, which suggests a lack of attention to detail on Dr. Ball's part, if not an indifference to the truth."

He further found that "the article is poorly written and does not advance credible arguments in favour of Dr. Ball's theory" and that because of that "the impugned words do not genuinely threaten Dr. Weaver's reputation."


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.4536096

Seems like Dr Ball has curled up into a ball....
Chill
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 84759
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: Andrew Weaver vs Tim Ball - libel case dismissed

Post by The Green Barbarian »

flamingfingers wrote:Seems like Dr Ball has curled up into a ball....


and it seems that man-made climate change is a fraud.
"The woke narcissists who make up the progressive left are characterized by an absolute lack of such conscience, but are experts at exploiting its presence in others." - Jordan Peterson
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Andrew Weaver vs Tim Ball - libel case dismissed

Post by rustled »

flamingfingers wrote:What was derogatory that Skolrood said about Weaver??
...

I did not say derogatory, I specifically said less-than-flattering.

You didn't find anything in the judgment that put Weaver in a poor light? The emails certainly don't show the quality of writing one would expect from a professor, although he seems to have written many of them in a fit of pique so perhaps he wasn't bothering with grammar.

Reading Skolrood's findings, it seems he felt the lawsuit was little more than a vanity effort. Of course, you may read something entirely different into these statements:
[66] I agree with Dr. Ball that many of the meanings advanced by Dr. Weaver are extreme and are not borne out when the words are considered from the perspective of a reasonable, right-thinking reader. This requires the court to assess the words objectively, and not to attribute the worst possible meaning or the meaning that might appear to the plaintiff or a person with an overly fragile sensibility.
...
[78] Second, despite professing to have been “saddened, sickened and dismayed” by the Article, I am not satisfied that Dr. Weaver himself perceived the Article as genuinely threatening his actual reputation. As noted, Dr. Weaver has been actively and publically engaged in the climate change discussion for many years. That included endorsing political candidates who advanced policies he agreed with and opposing candidates with whom he disagreed. It is also quite apparent that he enjoys the “thrust and parry” of that discussion and that he places little stock in opposing views such as those espoused by Dr. Ball, which Dr. Weaver characterized as “odd” and “bizarre”. Dr. Weaver went so far as to post the Article on his “wall of hate” located outside his office, alongside other articles and correspondence from “climate doubters”. It is apparent that he views such material as more of a “badge of honour” than a legitimate challenge to his character or reputation.
...
[82] The law of defamation provides an important tool for protecting an individual’s reputation from unjustified attack. However, it is not intended to stifle debate on matters of public interest nor to compensate for every perceived slight or to quash contrary view points, no matter how ill-conceived. Public debate on matters of importance is an essential element of a free and democratic society and lies at the heart of the Charter guarantee of freedom of expression. As Justice Lebel observes, such debate often includes critical and even offensive commentary, which is best met through engagement and well-reasoned rejoinder. It is only when the words used reach the level of genuinely threatening a person’s actual reputation that resort to the law of defamation is available. Such is not the case here.
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/sc/ ... SC0205.htm


So. Weaver did a Google search of his name and found something unflattering (gasp!), and after making a huge show of tacking it up on his Wall of Hate like some kind of badge of honour, chose to waste the court's time feigning "injury". If it hadn't been a waste of the court's time, he would have got the verdict he sought. If he had truly felt he had been injured, he ought not have amplified the injury by adding it proudly to his wall and taking up court time with this nonsense. And honestly, how scientific is it to silence your critics? (Einstein invited all comers to challenge his findings. That's perhaps the most important characteristic of scientific inquiry, to challenge that which we believe to be true.)

The "injurious" piece was retracted, the apology published, and still Weaver wanted his day in court, and he lost. Let's see if he can put on his big boy pants and get over it.

On the other hand, perhaps he simply wanted science to be "settled" in a court of law? Utterly ridiculous for anyone who calls himself a scientist to embark on such a bizarre effort, so I'd hope not. Although to read the Times Colonist or the CBC... cough. Just threw up a little in my mouth...

It came off as a SLAPP suit. Weaver should be embarrassed to be muzzling discussion.

If Weaver appeals, he's really just digging himself a deeper hole. IMO, of course.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Andrew Weaver vs Tim Ball - libel case dismissed

Post by rustled »

You know what's highly amusing?

The Times Colonist actually ran a piece advocating for anti-SLAPP just days before they printed that one-sided piece about Weaver's libel case.

Leading legal minds in B.C. seek anti-SLAPP legislation to halt abusive lawsuits

...the sole reason for SLAPP suits is to "censor public opinion, to intimidate people (and) to silence critics."

... "The justice system must be duly resourced and there is no question that it is costly. The remedy we are urging here is not costly, and indeed, is likely to bring cost savings in properly preserving limited judicial resources," the letter says.

B.C. Attorney General David Eby said Thursday that his government is committed to introducing legislation on lawsuits that unduly limit expression on matters of public interest.

"British Columbians should have the right to participate freely in public debates without fear of retribution," he said in a statement.

"We are currently considering the means of ensuring that such legislation will be as fair and effective as possible."
http://www.timescolonist.com/leading-le ... 1.23169119

And then, just days later, their reporter and the paper's editor both choose to completely ignore this:
[82] The law of defamation provides an important tool for protecting an individual’s reputation from unjustified attack. However, it is not intended to stifle debate on matters of public interest nor to compensate for every perceived slight or to quash contrary view points, no matter how ill-conceived. Public debate on matters of importance is an essential element of a free and democratic society and lies at the heart of the Charter guarantee of freedom of expression.

Interesting, huh?
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
User avatar
Jlabute
Guru
Posts: 6679
Joined: Jan 18th, 2009, 1:08 pm

Re: Andrew Weaver vs Tim Ball - libel case dismissed

Post by Jlabute »

The Green Barbarian wrote:
Hi Marc:
There are no media reports and my guess is there won’t be any.

At 0930 on the day the trial started we were told there was no judge or courtroom assigned. Amazingly and incorrectly, that information was reported almost immediately on media claiming the trial was postponed. It wasn’t, because by 1100 a judge and courtroom were assigned and the trail began at 1130. The postponement story likely explained why no media attended a single day of the three week trial. The nature of the case that involves a so-called climate change denier will likely also be ignored.


Where is the media on this? Come on you dunderheads! This is a huge story! Evil has been defeated!!

Where is the Michael "hide the decline" Mann/Mark Steyn case right now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/vol ... c08e663b13


Appears as though the Michael Mann vs Steyn case is in limbo as usual.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/02/23/citing-manns-legal-case-against-steyn-jacobsen-throws-in-the-towel-on-defamation-case/

“The irony here is, Mann, the plaintiff, is the one who’s been dragging his feet. He doesn’t want to go to court, because he knows he will lose, and lose big, as I suspect Jacobsen finally realized. Mann’s lawsuit has always been about “the process is the punishment”, not winning.
Lord Kelvin - When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it.
Post Reply

Return to “Canada”