Mary Lou MacDonald suing RTE

In the last 20 or so posts,

Oliver J Flanagan

Bertie Ahern

Brian Cowen

Michael Martin

Gerry Adams

Caesar

Virginia

& Santa Claus

have been mentioned, but you only get upset because Leo got mentioned in a roundabout point about party leaders>

Is that not a bit of a weird obsession?

Well, we can add SLAPPs to the list of things you don’t understand.

If MLMD was defamed, the place to go is BCI to complain, not to the courts to shut the tv company up and limit press freedom. I have never said that MLMD wasn’t defamed, it is just I can’t see what the defamation is, and neither can you. What I have said is that MLMD has deliberately chosen this particular method of redress in order to the topic being discussed. That is the point of the SLAPPs case. Even if it turns out that MLMD was defamed, that doesn’t take away from the premise that the case was taken in order to censor the media.

Now, tell me what abuse MLMD is claiming she was subject to? If you are attempting to equate what happened to MC at the hands of members of the PIRA to MLMD being defamed, there are no words to describe the moral depravity to which you have sunk.

And in relation to MC, none of your fake accusations of exploitation, again exposing your lack of dignity and respect, will prevent me from raising her case at every appropriate instance in order to help the woman achieve justice. I will do the same for Austin Stack, Paul Quinn, Brendan McGahon and many others who have been the victims of criminal thugs who have falsely claimed to be acting on behalf of the Irish people.

The primary aim of a SLAPPs case is to censor the media.

The BCI/Press Council process is sidestepped so that the media can be silenced.

Whether or not the person has been defamed or not is secondary (and ultimately materially irrelevant) to the required need of the plaintiff to silence the media.

I have not passed judgement on whether or not MLMD was defamed. However, it is clear that she is using the courts to silence the media.

The 'primary aim' of a defamation suit is to stop people defaming you.

MLMD has never said that this is not a SLAPPs action, so how can I be accusing her of lying?

You are either failing to understand the nature of a SLAPPs action or the nature of my point.

It is leading you into a completely unnecessary apoplexy of outrage. I have never in my posts on this issue accused MLMD of lying. If I have, point me to it.

Complete and utter nonsense.

Once again, I ask you, for the very last time, show me something that MLMD has said about this case, and where I am saying that she is lying.

If you can’t do that, have the decency to withdraw the accusation that I have said MLMD is lying.

I don’t want to do a Brucie on this and falsely accuse you of lying but I have genuinely missed the quotes where the NUJ or the Index of Censorship or any of the other NGOs have said that this might be a genuine bid to stop herself being defamed. Maybe you could point me to those exact words from them so I can learn.

I mean, her ordeal at potentially and remotely possibly being defamed by RTÉ is so much worse than what MC and BMcM had to endure, according to our resident fanatics.

'Making stuff up again' alert ^^^^^

What you mean is, some people jumped to conclusions and verdicts after post 2.

Intellectual capacity indeed.

No, a number of posters have repeatedly referred to Mary-Lou as a "victim".