?

Log in

Is it libellous to point out that Magnus Boyd has very silly hair? - B. Henderson Asher's Moments of Mirth [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Listen in, listen Ian!

[ website | Flickr ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Oct. 13th, 2009|01:57 pm]
Listen in, listen Ian!
Is it libellous to point out that Magnus Boyd has very silly hair?
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: spoonrefuter
2009-10-13 01:34 pm (UTC)
Hehehe - it rather looks like a bad Photoshop job, and yet patently isn't.
(Reply) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: carsmilesteve
2009-10-13 01:40 pm (UTC)
i wish i really really had nothing to do, as making a pack of top trumps out of this lot:

http://www.carter-ruck.com/Lawyers/

would seem to be a great way to spend an afternoon...
(Reply) (Thread)
From: gasboard
2009-10-13 01:49 pm (UTC)
I'd say it libellous or not, in fact I'd say it was a man's duty.
(Reply) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
From: gasboard
2009-10-13 04:01 pm (UTC)
Isn't it called a value judgement? Or did I just hear that on Derek & Clive?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: offensive_mango
2009-10-13 05:57 pm (UTC)
I think you can still libel people with the truth.

Oh wait, no, you can apparently defame them with truth but not libel them.

Edited at 2009-10-13 06:00 pm (UTC)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: xandratheblue
2009-10-13 04:02 pm (UTC)
My law-fu would suggest not. It's a fair (if subjective) comment, one that can honestly be believed and is unlikely to cause damage to his reputation/ability to earn (i.e. being a good lawyer). He can't sue for embaressment, but maybe he should sue his hairdresser for allowing such a (n implied) breech of contract!

Guess who's avoiding their homework, eh?
(Reply) (Thread)