Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Thread gallery
48
Katrinawaves · 22/07/2023 10:35

Anxioys · 22/07/2023 10:26

I appreciate they are different. But if there was a question of fact such as a link between Branning and Wootton, which is a key concern, would a judge be happy to proceed in that if it was known that the Met police were investigating?

Show quote history

Yes the judge would be happy to proceed. There is legal precedent to support the fact that civil proceedings should not ordinarily be stayed simply because there is an ongoing criminal investigation into the same factual background.

unbelieveable22 · 22/07/2023 10:56

Think we will all have a better idea early next week where this is going.

Byline already submitted 30 questions to Wooton's lawyers earlier this week. This was followed up, presumably after others contacting them, with a further 20 questions yesterday requesting answers by Monday.

Katrinawaves · 22/07/2023 11:07

unbelieveable22 · 22/07/2023 10:56

Think we will all have a better idea early next week where this is going.

Byline already submitted 30 questions to Wooton's lawyers earlier this week. This was followed up, presumably after others contacting them, with a further 20 questions yesterday requesting answers by Monday.

You do realise that Byline have no standing to issue any questions to Wootton’s lawyers though and there is absolutely no onus on them to respond.

Had Byline intended to offer a right to reply to Wootton, as they should have done given the seriousness of the allegations, they should have done this before they published not after the event. The fact they are doing this now that a complaint has been received will be very damaging to their case if Wootton does sue them and will almost certainly be fatal to any attempt by them to rely on any form of public interest defence (which requires these considerations to be made and documented prior to publication)

Anxioys · 22/07/2023 12:04

Tbh I am now reading Byline with some fascination - some interesting thoughts and interesting people like Brian Cathcart writing for it.

I am really fed up of journalism by press release or opinion driven stuff anywhere, Guardian, DM, DT. I've been reading the FT because it still has facts and knowledge in it.

StarbucksSmarterSister · 22/07/2023 13:05

CrazyArmadilloLady · 22/07/2023 02:24

Are they crowd-finding their legal fees?

Show quote history

See below.

Dan Wootton trending on Twitter...
SugarRaye · 22/07/2023 13:27

So they are crowd funding their legal fees. What a load of Trumpian losers! 😁

Anxioys · 22/07/2023 14:59

Trump is one of the world's richest men (his words). Funding his legal fees via his supporters reflects something an unbelievable level of taking the piss.

A teeny leftish newspaper not so much.

StarbucksSmarterSister · 22/07/2023 15:07

Anxioys · 22/07/2023 14:59

Trump is one of the world's richest men (his words). Funding his legal fees via his supporters reflects something an unbelievable level of taking the piss.

A teeny leftish newspaper not so much.

I think if someone hasn't got the money then crowd funding, as long as contributors know where the money is going, is absolutely fine. I think the issue with Wootton is, like Trump, he is supposed to be wealthy enough to pay for it. Maybe it's all smoke and mirrors or maybe he really isn't.

SugarRaye · 22/07/2023 15:15

StarbucksSmarterSister · 22/07/2023 15:07

I think if someone hasn't got the money then crowd funding, as long as contributors know where the money is going, is absolutely fine. I think the issue with Wootton is, like Trump, he is supposed to be wealthy enough to pay for it. Maybe it's all smoke and mirrors or maybe he really isn't.

Show quote history

Personally I don't care how either them fund it. Its not me that says either of them losers. But I've never heard that Wootton is wealthy. Who has said that?
And why would anyone expect a individual journalist to have more money than a functioning, successful newspaper?
If it's OK for one to crowdfund, then surely it's OK for both. 🤷

StarbucksSmarterSister · 22/07/2023 15:46

I have no idea what Wootton is worth . A lot of people are getting annoyed because there is speculation he is well off, presumably based on his career. BT seems to rely on subscription funding, it's not owned by extremely wealthy individuals like most of our press.

I agree that either can crowdfund if they are in a financial position to require it.

Roussette · 22/07/2023 15:51

Poor old Dan the Man. He won't sue BylineTimes, they are meticulous in their reporting and have never been sued before. Surely he wouldn't have to crowdfund his legal fees if GBN believed in him? They would defend him to protect their reputation surely.
His plea for money help is pretty desperate. His words "I want to keep fighting for you". Yeah right...

This from the co-founder of BT....
Peter Jukes
@peterjukes
In addition to the 30 detailed evidential questions
@BylineTimes
sent to Wootton's lawyers earlier this week, we've sent another 20 plus today to answer by Monday.

Every article we publish has been built up forensically.

The current response from Wootton: 'hard left blog'

SugarRaye · 22/07/2023 18:54

So people are condemning Wootton for crowdfunding because without having any knowledge of how much money he actually has, they think he will have a lot. Well, that seems intelligent and conclusive so I'm convinced. 🙄

Twyford · 22/07/2023 19:06

I hope the crowdfund is set up with proper protection for the funders against their own potential liability for costs.

SugarRaye · 22/07/2023 19:09

Aren't Bylines pleading for money, too. If they're that successful at journalism and intrepid investigation, they must earn a lot. Why is it defensible for one to crowdfund and not the other? Why does crowdfunding make one sound desperate but the other sound confident? Sounds like there's a lot of bias at play here.

If Bylines are sure of their facts, where is part 3? Why do they need Wootton to answer any questions before they can publish more. Why would Wootton respond to any of them?

Bylines have done a "forensic" investigation. Presumably they have evidence to back up all their claims. So why ask questions now? They should already have evidence as to the answers before having to ask those questions. Why be worried about printing everything they have?

Bylines, stop fannying around. You've been forensically investigating for three years. Just tell us what you know. You're not going to be sued if you have have clear evidence to back up each of your claims. You've started on your mission to trash Wotton's life so show us what you've got.

And, Bylines, a word to the wise, if you need funding, have a word with Johnny Depp because I'm pretty sure he'll kick into your fund to bring Wootton down.

Cornettoninja · 22/07/2023 19:09

I don’t really care about DW crowdfunding, it’s not like I plan to give him anything 🤷‍♀️

It is interesting that he apparently doesn’t have professional contacts ready to back him up. It does suggest that he’s been cut loose to some extent and this is the first time he’s facing something like this alone.

probably not as brave without the big boys behind him

SugarRaye · 22/07/2023 19:38

Cornettoninja · 22/07/2023 19:09

I don’t really care about DW crowdfunding, it’s not like I plan to give him anything 🤷‍♀️

It is interesting that he apparently doesn’t have professional contacts ready to back him up. It does suggest that he’s been cut loose to some extent and this is the first time he’s facing something like this alone.

probably not as brave without the big boys behind him

How do you know what professional contacts he has or hasn't got, though? Weren't people saying the other day that you can see how newspapers are protecting him by not really talking about this at all. So maybe that's a sign of his professional contacts?
And of course when he was publishing articles in newspapers, it was the newspapers being sued so clearly they have to defend themselves, and so to that end, him too. But if someone has committed actions on a private basis, why would their employers step in to pay your legal fees? What company would do that? Would yours? Mine certainly wouldn't! I wonder if we see newspapers in court so often, we think its a place where they want to be?
And of course, he's going to be feeling the heat when it's his own money on the line. Wouldn't we all feeling that? I don't know why you're mocking him for feeling like that because you'd feel exactly the same. Everyone would.
I actually know someone who the Mirror wrote an article about. The guy had got sacked. The Mirror gave some wrong facts which made it sound worse than it was. My friend could never sue to rectify it because he couldn't afford it. So when I see the papers bullying individuals, it makes me really mad because I can remember how it affected my friend.
I don't like Wootton for things he has written in the past. Journalists seem to lose track that in their urge to write a story to fill a couple of column inches, the people they write about are real people, with real families. I can't help feeling a quiet satisfaction that Wootton is feeling a bit of the pain that he has inflicted on others. But what's being said has to be true and evidenced. Not "they think" or "it couldn't anyone else" or "apparently" because that's all weasly mouthed. It wasn't right when Wootton did it and it's not right if it's done to him.

Cornettoninja · 22/07/2023 19:51

How do you know what professional contacts he has or hasn't got, though? Weren't people saying the other day that you can see how newspapers are protecting him by not really talking about this at all. So maybe that's a sign of his professional contacts?

I don’t, obviously, but the media silence could be a sign of support (without putting their money where their mouths are) or it could be knowing his methods have been less than ethical and they’re keen to distance themselves from scrutiny. Who knows.

It wasn't right when Wootton did it and it's not right if it's done to him

fair comment. But I’m also not apologetic for enjoying the shadenfraude. I don’t see why he should be given the kind of standards he’s made a career out of denying others. The problem with playing by the rules is that people like him trample all over them then use them as a shield when things go wrong.

He’s not a stupid man, he made choices, considered choices and one of those was to step outside soft societal rules to make himself a career making others lives miserable. Speculation and gossip about others is precisely how he made his name, I’ve no problem with him being on the receiving end.

StarbucksSmarterSister · 22/07/2023 20:25

Twyford · 22/07/2023 19:06

I hope the crowdfund is set up with proper protection for the funders against their own potential liability for costs.

T and C here.

https://democracythree.org/terms-of-use

Terms of use

https://democracythree.org/terms-of-use

Twyford · 22/07/2023 23:33

If Bylines are sure of their facts, where is part 3? Why do they need Wootton to answer any questions before they can publish more. Why would Wootton respond to any of them?

Perhaps they are giving him the chance to have his say, given that he is denying the story.

SugarRaye · 23/07/2023 00:32

Twyford · 22/07/2023 23:33

If Bylines are sure of their facts, where is part 3? Why do they need Wootton to answer any questions before they can publish more. Why would Wootton respond to any of them?

Perhaps they are giving him the chance to have his say, given that he is denying the story.

But I thought there is a press code that the person you're writing about has to be given a chance to put their views before the article is published. Not afterwards. And the response they give is not in the form of answers to a series of questions! Lol. But in their own words. But maybe Bylines doesn't have to follow those guidelines?

CarlosAlcaraz · 23/07/2023 00:49

It's getting really murky now, a chap that has accused DW of SA (I think separately to BT) has been revealed as using an alias and has been prosecuted for extortion of gay men .

CarlosAlcaraz · 23/07/2023 01:34

@SugarRaye yes

SugarRaye · 23/07/2023 02:22

I can't be bothered to look but I think someone mentioned him a couple of pages back. That they'd read about him on the evervreliable Twitter. 😄 Although, to be fair, they did say he might be unreliable.