Replies

Difference is, if you did none of the above and had absolutely no proof to support your claims, you could get hit with libel, slander and defamation of character suits. OB can afford to do it, easily....but hasn’t.....yet. I find that....”interesting”.

I don't find it at all interesting This isn't the UK. It is virtually impossible in the US for a public figure to win a libel suit. You'll note that the President hasn't stooped to suing the internet kooks who claim he was responsible for 9/11. I think this is the same kind of crap.

“It is virtually impossible in the US for a public figure to win a libel suit.”

How many celebs have successfully sued the National Enquirer? [or similar gossip rags]

Tom Cruise is a the top of the list and I do believe Jennifer Aniston hit them too.

http://injury-law.freeadvice.com/libel_and_slander/public_figure_lawsuit.htm

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/l/libel_and_slander/index.html?query=NATIONAL%20ENQUIRER&field=org&match=exact

http://www.allbusiness.com/libel-slander/4973390-1.html

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-libel.html

It happens more often than you think and the courts are starting to enforce suits regardless of the “celebrity status” loophole.

If OB wanted to, he’d have a strong case.

Of course, as the old legal adage goes, the ultimate defense against libel is truth.

Either you have it or you don’t.