Woman found guilty of defamation for describing her exh's DV

[Bluestitch]

He put his hands round her throat. But the judge decided he was only trying to silence her, not kill her so she shouldn't have used the term 'strangled'. And she has also been suffering cancer during this legal battle. She's taking it to the Supreme Court, good for her.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/01/23/woman-found-have-defamed-ex-husband-facebook-takes-fight-supreme/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

I mentioned Saatchi upthread but I'd forgotten his defence:

'I was not gripping, strangling or throttling her,' he told the court.

'I was holding her head by the neck to make her focus, can we be clear?'

The difference there being that everyone had already seen the photos.

Was there evidence he strangled her?

Yes the judge found that a common assault had been committed and that he had held her by her neck sufficient to leave red marks observed by police 2 hours after the incident.

If someone warned me about a man who has grabbed them by the neck in the past, I'd be thankful and it wouldn't make any difference to me whether the man in question had intended to kill, silence or make the woman "focus" (nice one, Saatchi). It all sounds like a violent man to me.

"'I was holding her head by the neck to make her focus" - shocking that men like Saatchi think it's just fine and dandy to use physical force to make a woman do something they don't want to. It's shocking that this was his defence/explanation/mitigation! That he has the right to lay hands on women to make them do things by force.

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/21/campaigners-stage-walkout-of-secretive-police-spying-inquiry

Interesting article about Judge Mitting.

Do such men behave the same way towards men? Not likely.

At the time the man had his hands on her throat, squeezing hard enough to leave handprints, that woman undoubtedly thought he was trying to kill her.
She must have still believed that, at the time of the FB post and why shouldn't she still believe it now? so she was saying what she believed to be true.
How can that be an offence?

It's worse than that Grandma, she never even claimed that he tried to kill her. The judge decided that must be what she meant based on one of the dictionary definitions of the word 'strangle' and so penalised her for what he decided she must have been implying.

How is the appeal going? Will it last for a while?

They finished it earlier, I'm keeping an eye out for when the decision will be delivered.

FFS - I just heard this on the news and came here to see if there was a thread about it. Thanks for the link - I've donated. Sooooooo angry

bluestitch thank you for posting the links to watch live, I missed the end part-this was scheduled to be decided today wasn’t it? Is there any reason it wasn’t?

I didn't hear anything about when it will be decided either. This article gives a good overview about what was argued today.

amp.theguardian.com/law/2019/jan/24/uk-supreme-court-hears-facebook-libel-case-appeal?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true

www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/03/new-zealand-mp-speaks-of-abuse-ordeal-as-new-laws-tackle-strangulation-attacks

"Research has found being strangled by a partner is an especially strong signal of escalating abuse, and leads to a seven-fold increase in the risk of being murdered by your partner. Strangulation attempts are frequently missed by police and health workers because there can be no obvious or immediate injuries."

"Around the world various jurisdictions are beginning to introduce separate offences for non-fatal strangulation, including Queensland in Australia, and 47 states in the US."

Why does the UK always have to lag behind? We NEED a law against strangulation. And that should be under any circumstances ie including "sex games". Sorry, hard cheese and all that to those who claim to love a bit of sexual strangulation. It's a dangerous practice and needs legislating against for the protection of all women.

Incredibly within a fortnight of the law being passed 29 people were charged with the new offence. This is widespread.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/nearly-30-people-charged-strangulation-since-family-violence-law-changed-just-11-days-ago?variant=tbvv_1

Sorry for the slight derail but I think this is relevant to the case. Indeed I would suggest her barrister should quote some of the research from New Zealand to show how it is a common abusive action which frequently results in death.

In the Telegraph too. I'm glad this is being widely reported.

Telegraph

Article says judges will "reserve their decision" - so we won't hear for a while?

Bluestitch thank you so much for your efforts today with this. It has been horrifying to consider how we got to this stage, but extremely interesting to listen to the legal arguments.

I really hope common sense prevails.

Do we know when the verdict (finding?) will be delivered?

I've looked but can't see anything to say when.

Looking properly at the news articles and photos though, I see that Deborah Bligh (the recipient of the Facebook post) is still with the man! Talk about ignoring red flags.

Looking properly at the news articles and photos though, I see that Deborah Bligh (the recipient of the Facebook post) is still with the man! shock Talk about ignoring red flags.
Telegraph give the XW and XH's ages (17 year gap) but not the new GF. I'm guessing she's much younger than him too. He must be rich because he's got a face like unstirred semolina.

She's certainly not with him for his looks is she? Flyingoink