Mary Lou MacDonald suing RTE

But that is where the argument begins and ends for you with this case involving MLMD. You won't hear any negative view against her or view on possible motivations. The fact that she has a right to do something is enough for you. Nobody questioned her right (even though you keep accusing them of doing so)

Likewise, litigious Jimmy would likely have threatened the newspapers. In the end, the fact that he was so trigger happy was enough for them to know not to risk it. He was also only asserting his rights. So they didn't even attempt to publish on him. It can be quite an advantage to get that litigious reputation!

Yes, you are the only one that keeps going on about her right. Here is a post where I said explicitly that everyone has the right. Subsequent to that, you have just kept going on and on about how I, and others, are trying to say she doesn't have a right.

The reason that people are questioning/criticising is that the cause of the action has been reported as being an interview, in which nobody can identify the defamation.

The courts don’t censor as you said. They penalise defamation. Your post clarifies that you don’t understand the workings of the judiciary yet have no hesitation in posting about it.

He is correct, nobody has questioned her rights. You have made that strawman accusation against me, yet I have asked several times for you to produce the quote where I questioned her right to take a case.

The defamation laws are in need of reform because they are over-protective of the rights of people like Jimmy Saville. Do you agree? Or are you happy with the rights that Jimmy Saville availed of?

In my opinion she is not looking to win, she is looking to scare RTE off investigating Sinn Fein.

so you agree she is within her rights - and you cant disagree with her reason as you don't know what it is.

What are you disagreeing with exactly? Are you being a political Karen?

How do you mean in the case of Sir Jimmy Saville 'there was no legal proof'? There was plenty of it, including testimony of actual victims who existed at the time, but they were all silenced by the British establishment, the same establishment who knew what was going on and gave the sick f**king piece of $hit a knighthood from her majesty to go with it. You trying to equate the shinners to the likes of Sir Jimmy is beyond laughable, I suppose the shinners can rely on the same establishment protection that Saville got, yeah? Can they f**k

It sure is. S/he says, specifically:

they reported the suit and said it is thought to be in relation to the interview with Bríd and Regina on the women's protest

I find it very strange that RTE doesn't seem to know exactly what the case is about, despite being the respondent.

RTE news would not have said that

Are you employed by RTE news to tell the world what they think? Or maybe you have a direct line to them?

You don't know any of that actually

I asked earlier is it conceivable that the leader of SF was not aware of the circumstances asked about in the segment

A court will need to decide that and in my opinion going to court risks the airing of a considerable amount of RTÉ archived investigative material

Precisely. A court will decide, not bored.ie or any of us posters here.

Journalists have been píssed off now

OOOOOh nasty!!!!!!

I'm surprised to be honest at the mis step in advice on how to handle this

Opening a potential hornets nest of up to now possibly un published material which can be reported on in court proceedings seems stupid to me

You might be right, but given your apparent hatred of SF I would have thought you'd be jubilant about SF taking a "mis step" as you call it.

Personally, I feel that SF have generally been very careful about this sort of thing, given the way they have always been treated by RTE in the past. I'd guess, whatever the details of the case, that SF believe they have a solid case that they cannot fail to win. I'd also guess that they are taking this case to ensure that RTE are very careful how they report everything to do with SF in the future. With a view, as someone said above, to RTE being very, very careful between now and the next election.

But that's just my opinion.

And what about when Testimony or evidence can't even be provided when the suspect can literally threaten investigators who are trying to carry out their duties, as what happened with Sir Jimmy and the Yorkshire police? What happens then?

As I said, read the article. Their legal advice was that Saville would win any case stemming from it.

One could probably safely assume that their legal teams might have known a bit more than randomers on internet message boards (including me) who are learning about it for the first time

Articles from the same gutter media trash that actively harbored the likes of Saville and the likes of him in the establishment are of no concern to me. And they shouldn't be for you either.

Well the police try to do it every day of the week and are constantly pissing into the wind and treated like mugs by the legal racket , so why the f**k should I bother?