This story was in the Village People gossip column in today’s “The Independent”."Alex Hilton, star of the Labour blogosphere and Labour candidate for Kensington & Chelsea, won a minor victory in the High Court this week, in a case which illustrates how easy it is to get sued for libel in the UK. He owns the website Labourhome, on which another Labour blogger, John Gray, wrote about a political activist named Johanna Kaschke, who left the Labour Party in 2007, to join George Galloway's Respect Party, then joined a communist party of some description, and since autumn 2007 has been an active Conservative.
In 1975, Kaschke was falsely suspected by the German police of links to the Baader Meinhof terrorist gang. She was arrested, but eventually released and awarded compensation.
She objected to having this old story dug up on LabourHome. Hilton removed the post and offered right of reply, but she decided to go to court. She lodged five complaints, but this week, the court struck out four. One point m'learned friends may yet have to deliberate, seriously, is whether it is actionable to describe someone as "one cherry short of a Schwarzwalderkirschtorte".
Not quite the full story but...No comment!
4 comments:
Mr Gray, may I point out to you that the German police did never, never at any time suspect me of connections to the Baader-Meinhof group. how many more times, do I have to inform you of that fact. Also Alex Hilton did not offer me a right of reply, which I refused. This is evidence in an ongoing court case, which you are falsely depicting on your blog.
I shall now also contact the Independent about the same complaint.
Ms Kaschke
If you had any concerns about this post you should have contacted me in the proper way. Since you have chosen to make this comment in a semi-public arena and on your own blog I will respond.
As you well know by now I consider your argument that the German authorities “never, never” suspected you (wrongly) of such “connections” is to me completely and utterly ridiculous. The evidence is overwhelming.
I do not understand from your comment whether or not you are accepting that Alex did offer you a reply but I have actually seen his offer which you did not take up for whatever reason.
I think you have a bit of a cheek to complain about this post “ongoing court case” bearing in the mind your numerous comments and postings about all aspects of the case.
Mr Gray you are the one who keeps on posting about matters that are currently disputed via the libel court proceedings. You should not keep on repeating what I am complaining about until you are either found right or wrong.
Also it seems I cannot win with you, if I write to you, you say I should have replied on the blog and if I reply on the blog, you say, I should have written to you.
I have noticed you did not request the papers I have offered to you via the disclosure list. The "real" evidence is overwhelmingly in my favour and it is merely your fantasy that makes connections, which are only in your mind.
I thank you for publishing my replies but unfortunately I have no choice but to make them as otherwise you create public impressions about me, I rather can do without.
Hi Ms Kaschke
Since you keep making public comments about this case on this blog (and elsewhere) I will respond.
BTW - I have never, ever said you should reply to stuff on my blog!
You listed again every single document on your computer, not what you should be using in court. Why should I request papers which have no relevance whatsoever to any case?
There is only one fantasist and I think we all know who that it don’t we.
Post a Comment