Sheridan wins £200,000 defamation case against Murdoch rag

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by frenchperson, Aug 4, 2006.

  1. Yes. Nobody should be above the law, no matter how wealthy

  2. No. Murdochs newspapers are beyond criticism

  3. Duuuh. I dunno


Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. A heartwarming story here and a long overdue kick in the teeth for his unwholesomeness, the Dirty Digger. It's refreshing to see that 12 randomly selected honest Scots jurors can see through the lies to give a resounding thumbs down to lurid, cheap and cynical journalism. Get your wallet out Rupert. Oh, and there's half a million in costs too you filthy stinking stain on the backside of the media and the broader corrupt world of legalised crooks and wasters.
  2. A heartwarming story indeed, Frenchy. I feared the worst when I learned that Tony Sheridan was taking Murderoch to court. But it seems there are still some small corners of the world where justice has the upper edge.

  3. ningún humo sin fuego!

    His wife looks a bit, erm, well you know what I mean....
  4. :lol: :lol:
  5. I am all for Murdoch being made to look a fool but what on earth was the guy thinking in making that speech outside court? Even his wife couldn't keep a straight face.
  6. That was one angry man having his moment. I'm chuffed for him. He was right in what he said about the standard of press reporting in this country. In some cases, such as the Sun, the Mirror and the the NOTW, it truly is appaling and we need more high profile cases like Tommy Sheridan's day in court to show the public just what it's tabloid press, which the Brits love so much, is actualy capable of doing to a man if it doesn't like him. Maybe then, the average Joe in the street might stop buying the sh*t.

    These people aren't journailists. They destroy lives an they do it because they can.

    Have a look at the thread concerning the lad who was killed recently in Basrah. The Sun advertised asking for people who knew him to get in touch with them. Not only an atrocious act, but one which showed that they can't even be bothered to do thier own investigation.

    The Sheridan case shouldn't be about Sheridan himself nor the specific allegations against him, it should highlight the standards of our press, or lack of them as the case may be.

    The press must be made more accountable.
  7. Murdoch's only success here was giving Sheridan a much-needed shot in the arm - the funding for a renewed political platform, plenty of publicity and a great issue to build his campaign on. Murdoch will come back with more innuendo, if not direct allegations. So at this stage, let's hope the appeal fails and that charges of perjury can be made to stick with the 18 sickos who took Murdoch's 30 pieces of silver.
  8. I think that they will as well. And as for Mr Sheridan, well let's wish him every success in his political pursuits. That might go against the grain with some people, but anyone prepared to go to jail for his beliefs is OK by me.

    Could you see Tony or Dave, Ming or Jack McConnell doing anything like that? Could you f*ck.
  9. The difficulty I have with this is simple. It's the only case in which for personal preference I wanted both sides to lose.
  10. Auld-Yin

    Auld-Yin LE Reviewer Book Reviewer Reviews Editor

    FP - firstly Scottish Juries comprise of 15 people. Secondly as the reporter on Radio Forth said the verdict surprised everyone who had sat through 23 days of evidence.

    I think that Murdoch and his lackeys will appeal this one. I don't think this case if over and done with.
  11. Sixty

    Sixty LE Moderator Book Reviewer
    1. ARRSE Cyclists and Triathletes

    Only in criminal cases mate. This was a civil jury trial so it was 12 (7-4 majority because one juror was allowed to go on holiday)

    Very surprised that he got the decision though after 18 different people testified against him. No way in the world that the NOTW will let this lie.

    The appeal and any subsequent perjury investigation will run and run.
  12. I believe I read the NOTW chief ******, sorry, chief editor saying that the judgement was wrong as it suggested 18 separate witnesses had committed a massive perjury.
  13. I'm glad he beat the rag - but he doesnt half spout a lot of bo**cks
  14. Firstly, Scottish Juries only have 15 people on criminal cases. Civil cases have a jury of 12. In this case there was only 11 because one female juror was excused to go on holidays.

    Secondly. This is a total reflection on the so called Scottish Socialist Party. What is socialist about the entire hierarchy trying to stitch one another up?

    Lastly, I'm not convinced. I think Tommy Sheridan is the luckiest man in Scotland today and I'll be most interested in the outcome of the appeal.

    Not that I'm for Murdoch you understand, but I have found the gall of all the witnesses in this case incredible - especially the evidence given by Sheridan himself.
  15. One of the criticisms that is often levelled against juries in celebrity libel trials is that they sometimes (not in this case, of course) make decisions (about verdict and award) on the basis of their attitudes towards the parties.