Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Angry
Why not? It's a prosecutable offence.
---------- Post added at 15:05 ---------- Previous post was at 15:02 ----------
When the person on the receiving end of it deems it to be distressful, abusive or insulting to them.
|
Oh come on ... that won't do at all and I'm pretty sure you know it.
You're proposing a situation where this happens:
Complainant: I feel insulted.
Defendant: My comments were a reasonable expression of my personal feelings.
Complainant: But I feel insulted.
Beak: Guilty as charged.
Section 5(1) of the Act creates an offence, but 5(3)(c) creates a defence. If the defence is valid, you can't just go round in a circle and trump it by re-stating the offence.
Now, once again, I ask out of genuine interest for the views of one who is knowledgeable in these things: where do the courts generally set the bar, beyond which a defence of 'reasonable' comment is no longer acceptable? What makes the comment 'unreasonable'?