Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

For an honest opinion defense as i understand it, the statement...

First 98 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
Hingdog

22,668 Posts.

1399

01/05/24

20:02

Post #: 73616613
Share

Originally posted by Dochico ↑

I'm still not convinced Linda should be doing this.

Justice Lee said he didn't find evidence of a political coverup - but the Lehrmann case wasn't really about the allegations of a coverup so he probably didn't seen all the evidence available, and there may be witnesses that would come forward.

For example - why was Brittany shuttled off to a hotel in Perth?

But even assuming Justice Lee is correct and there wasn't a coverup, that's not the end of the story.

Truth is only one of the defenses against a defamation claim. Another is the "Honest Opinion" Defence.

If Brittany can show she had enough reason to believe there was a coverup going on - even if there wasn't - then that would be enough to win the case.

She was a rape victim being very publicly exposed. The judge could well rule it was her honest opinion, or he could decide that it was close enough to warrant a very minimal payment of damages to Linda.

Just not a slam dunk in my view.

Expand

For an honest opinion defense as i understand it, the statement must be made as a statement of opinion, not a statement of fact. I'd have to go back and look at exactly what's been said, but I never got the idea that Brit simply held the opinion that there was a political cover up, it seemed to be very much a statement of fact
4 Upvote

Reply

There are more pages in this discussion • 36 more messages in this thread...

First 98 Last