Christians arrested for defending their beliefs

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by zing

I think they should perhaps sue the Muslim woman for defamation. This has ruined their lives

That would be a very perilous enterprise for them, as the burden of proof is less. They would have to; a) proof that they did not behave they way in which they were accused and b) that the defendant's actions were the cause of their lack of trade.

---------- Post added at 17:49 ---------- Previous post was at 17:45 ----------

Originally Posted by zing

exactly but those accused are now ruined. The Muslim woman and whoever it was advised her to run to the police are to blame

Also she has not changed the accussation even though there were witnesses that did not back up her side of the story

And they are to take no responsibility in any part of those at all? Perhaps this will also serve to remind other people in the hospitality industry that they pee off their clientele to their own detriment.

Originally Posted by Flyboy

That would be a very perilous enterprise for them, as the burden of proof is less. They would have to; a) proof that they did not behave they way in which they were accused and b) that the defendant's actions were the cause of their lack of trade.

You have this all back to front and upside down. If they were to commence libel proceedings against Tazi, it would be with regard to the things she said about them, and therefore for Tazi to defend herself using any of the range of defences set out in the Defamation Acts. She would most likely have to make her defence by claiming that her statements were the truth, in which case she would have to prove that they were. That would be tricky, because a court has already failed to find her truthful, and as you correctly point out the burden of proof is lower in a defamation case. That burden of proof, however, is working against Tazi, not for her.

What the the Vogelenzangs would in fact have to show is this:

A) That, on the balance of probabilities, Tazi did in fact make certain claims about the Vogelenzangs behaviour;
B) That their standing in the eyes of the common man was reduced as a result.

The first point is certainly proven, and I see no problem with the basic cause-and-effect of the second point, certainly not at the level of proof required in the case. Your suggestion that they would have to prove "that they did not behave they way in which they were accused" is way off beam. In a libel action, the complainant effectively says, "you said some nasty things about me, now prove that you have the right to say them". It is not for the subject of libellous comments to prove that those comments are untrue. It is for the person who made the comments to prove that they are true, or else the comments were reasonably made (for example, a defence of fair comment, although that would be unlikely to be relevant in this case).

Set against all of this, of course, is the fact that Tazi has the legal protection of qualified privilege to make the statements she did while in Police interview or on the stand at Court. Nothing she said in either of those contexts can result in a defamation claim, even if it were later shown to be a complete pack of lies. She could, on the other hand, be at risk of a charge of perjury (although I don't think that's likely here).

A libel action would be likely to fail firstly because Tazi made her claims in a privileged context. She may have repeated them outside of that context but the Vogelenzangs would have to prove that publication of those comments has taken place. If they did that, the action would then almost certainly fail at the second hurdle. There's little point denying that this has damaged their business, but it is clearly the court case that has damaged their business, not any unprivileged libel by Tazi.

[Flyboy]

You are right, the burden of proof would be less for her to show, in regards their claim for defamation. However, in the counter-suit it would still be their case to prove, as I mentioned earlier. She could claim that she was harassed and as a result suffered physical and mental harm.

[rogerdraig]

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

I bet there won't be any JW'S knocking at the Bounty House Hotel
They will certainly meet their match there

http://www.capc.co.uk/images/Tezza%2...0Witnesses.gif

we don't mind a bit of competition at all

seen much worse than that on front doors in my time and much more though out ones too that gets 5.5 out of ten

as to them taking this further i doubt they will but if they were to i would have thought the malicious prosecution route would be their best option given that the Judge seemed to be saying he had heard nothing to back up any of the acusations

[Flyboy]

But that would be a case against the CPS, wouldn't it?

[dilli-theclaw]

Originally Posted by Thomas T

I don't get any knocks on the door since I moved from Biggleswade.

It must be said it's nice to not be told I'm evil and should be rotting in hell when I answer the door now.

Just to follow up....

I must have spoken too soon as I had a knock on the door

As these were polite and didn't start the abuse I have experienced on several previous occasions I was in fact impressed.

They offered to leave a magazine and when I told them I wouldn't be able to read it they even offered to drop be a braille copy off, now THAT is impressive.

Anyway as I do try to listen to everyones opinion I'll be reading it to see what I think.

I take it they are JW's?

they do audio Watchtower as well as far as I am aware . They have a big organisation called Bethal that prints all the magazines and other media on site for global distribution they also have all the archives of Watchtower on CD rom

Originally Posted by Thomas T

They offered to leave a magazine and when I told them I wouldn't be able to read it they even offered to drop be a braille copy off, now THAT is impressive.

Sounds like toilet paper thats stippled for your pleasure.

[dilli-theclaw]

Originally Posted by zing

I take it they are JW's?

they do audio Watchtower as well as far as I am aware . They have a big organisation called Bethal that prints all the magazines and other media on site for global distribution they also have all the archives of Watchtower on CD rom

Indeed they were - it was the first time I had what I'd call a 'good experience' with them so I am prepared to look through their literature I'm not sure how to put this nicely - um..... If people are nice to me then I have no problems at all being nice back, but previous visits were frankly quite abusive and upset me so I did not want to listen to what was being said.

They didn't mention an audio version, probably as they saw my braille machine I'd guess.

Anyway - I'd better not go too far OT - I was just following up on my previous post

[rogerdraig]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

But that would be a case against the CPS, wouldn't it?

yep as if they have suffered real hardship loss of trade its most likely thier best chance of some sort of compensation and in any case as good Christians they wouldn't want to take revenge on her

Romans 12:19-21

[papa smurf]

We're selling our hotel, say Christian couple in row with Muslim guest

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0jTDR5TFR

[Flyboy]

And good riddance to them.

[Russ]

Racist! Religionist! Somethingist!

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

And good riddance to them.

for exercising their right of religious expression ?

[Russ]

It didn't get anywhere in court but didn't the BBC suggest that the Muslim woman helped create the situation and the judge suggested something similar?