[Ragtime Cowgirl]

Gilligan must go and, under British law, could, I believe, even face criminal charges.

Is this true? Tell me more, please. I've been wondering what "news" is so important (barring national disasters or other immediate physical risks) - what byline, 24/7 deadline, prize - can excuse a mainstream reporter's use of unverified facts and unreliable sources to create a 'scandalous' banner headlined article that smears someone unjustly or endangers our troops, or our war efforts.

The museum looting, trumpeted as it was around the world just after our troops entered Baghdad to flowers and cheers - should have cost at least one journalist a job, imho. Parroting another journalists work is no excuse.

[propertius]

Talking to a British lawyer, who admittedly said it would be hard to pin down, my understanding is they could get him on two counts: involuntary manslaughter, first of all. If Gilligan exaggerated what Kelly said to such an extent that it can be shown it drove the man to suicide and if that exaggeration can be shown to be wilful with the intention of causing distress they can get him on that count. It's all to do with a Gaslight style case where a husband drove his wife literally crazy over a period of years by making the house seem haunted that she killed herself.
The second case that could be brought is something to do with an offshoot clause of the Official Secrets Act that prohibits reckless endangerment of national security. Publishing falsehoods about why Britain went to war could, I am told, fall in that category.

Anyway... keeping my fingers crossed.