Farage hasn't yet denied everything!

Barboo · 29-03-2008, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by douglas denny

I now know It is most likely someone I know near here in the Chichester area - there cannot be many to claim to have known Peter Hunt well. (slipped-up there Barboo!)

I did not claim to have known Peter Hunt 'well'. I said I knew and thought highly of him, which I did. We corresponded on several occasions and I spoke to him at meetings. Unlike you, Douglas, he was a man of such outstanding qualities that the very slightest acquaintance with him was sufficient to impress one with his worth.

Barboo · 29-03-2008, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Independent UKIP

The above is what I mean.

Yes, what about it? What subsequent comments have I made that you think conflict with what I wrote here? I'm happy to explain if I can, but I just don't get the point you're driving at.

charlie endell · 30-03-2008, 05:32 PM

The much hyped (and oft-promised) retraction did not appear in today's Sunday Times.

What will be the "explanation" this week, I wonder?

charlie endell · 13-04-2008, 12:37 PM

The retraction has still not appeared. The allegations have still not gone away. I think in the absence of a retraction, we are entitled to a full explanation from Farage.

Incidentally, I am aware that Farage's letter to the Sunday Times conceded that there is indeed an OLAF investigation.

Perhaps we could have an explanation of that as well?

Anthony Butcher · 13-04-2008, 03:37 PM

According to the press office, suing is actually very tricky due to a change in the law which means that the whole article has to be taken into consideration. Contrary to Mark Croucher's assertion that nothing in the article was true, most of the article is actually based in fact (hired his wife, there is an 'investigation') so even if he hasn't hired his son at all, it makes it risky to sue.

I find this hard to believe, but then I am not a lawyer.

If it is the case, then I can see no reason why a PCC complaint hasn't been put in already. It's free, it's risk free, and will force the paper to print a retraction at the very least.

Hartlepool · 13-04-2008, 03:43 PM

Didn't the Bar Hill write-up refer to this,it was posted here yesterday I believe.

I think it said something about it all but can't remember the story though.

Anyway,we have all had a bet on which story breaks first,(that one or the Mugabe one).

Anthony Butcher · 13-04-2008, 04:16 PM

You are absolutely right:

Quote:

He highlighted the “pack of lies” written about him recently in a Sunday newspaper, about which he was seeking legal redress

Does 'legal redress' mean that he is definitely suing?

If so, good luck to him. If it is as risky as the press office stated, then it is a bold move indeed. BUT, he is apparently using Carter-Ruck who are, I believe, notorious for taking on no-win, no-fee libel cases and intimidating their opponent though the sheer potential legal costs if they lose.

Hartlepool · 13-04-2008, 04:35 PM

Any losses should be paid by Farage,UKIP spends far too much of its members funds on this kind of thing.

If he wins,he keeps the cash,if he loses,he pays up,not UKIP,thats only fair.

Hartlepool · 13-04-2008, 07:31 PM

REDRESS.....to make amends for;to set right;to compensate;to adjust;.....

charlie endell · 13-04-2008, 08:51 PM

Anthony, I heard about this "change in the law", which makes everything a bit tricky. Its codswallop.

Farage is saying that because the bit about his wife is true, he can't sue for the rest.

If I wrote in the Sunday Times that: "Anthony Butcher's name is Anthony Butcher, and he has been convicted of molesting goats and attempting to hold up the Wells Fargo Express whilst high on Heroin", would my comments about your name exonerate me from libel on the other 3 points?

Of course not.

He's on the ropes, isn't he!

And what about the OLAF investigation?

I think we deserve an explanation, otherwise how can we have any confidence or trust in Farage?

13-04-2008, 03:37 PM	#15 (permalink)
Anthony Butcher Administrator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Long Ashton, Bristol Posts: 10,315 Party: None	According to the press office, suing is actually very tricky due to a change in the law which means that the whole article has to be taken into consideration. Contrary to Mark Croucher's assertion that nothing in the article was true, most of the article is actually based in fact (hired his wife, there is an 'investigation') so even if he hasn't hired his son at all, it makes it risky to sue. I find this hard to believe, but then I am not a lawyer. If it is the case, then I can see no reason why a PCC complaint hasn't been put in already. It's free, it's risk free, and will force the paper to print a retraction at the very least. __________________ If you care about what's in your food and where it comes from, then get it labelled! Label My Food - http://www.labelmyfood.org.uk

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

30-03-2008, 05:32 PM	#13 (permalink)
charlie endell Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 249	The much hyped (and oft-promised) retraction did not appear in today's Sunday Times. What will be the "explanation" this week, I wonder?

13-04-2008, 12:37 PM	#14 (permalink)
charlie endell Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 249	The retraction has still not appeared. The allegations have still not gone away. I think in the absence of a retraction, we are entitled to a full explanation from Farage. Incidentally, I am aware that Farage's letter to the Sunday Times conceded that there is indeed an OLAF investigation. Perhaps we could have an explanation of that as well?

13-04-2008, 03:43 PM	#16 (permalink)
Hartlepool Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Northern England Posts: 7,105 Party: Free England Party	Didn't the Bar Hill write-up refer to this,it was posted here yesterday I believe. I think it said something about it all but can't remember the story though. Anyway,we have all had a bet on which story breaks first,(that one or the Mugabe one).

13-04-2008, 04:35 PM	#18 (permalink)
Hartlepool Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Northern England Posts: 7,105 Party: Free England Party	Any losses should be paid by Farage,UKIP spends far too much of its members funds on this kind of thing. If he wins,he keeps the cash,if he loses,he pays up,not UKIP,thats only fair.

13-04-2008, 07:31 PM	#19 (permalink)
Hartlepool Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Northern England Posts: 7,105 Party: Free England Party	REDRESS.....to make amends for;to set right;to compensate;to adjust;.....

13-04-2008, 08:51 PM	#20 (permalink)
charlie endell Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 249	Anthony, I heard about this "change in the law", which makes everything a bit tricky. Its codswallop. Farage is saying that because the bit about his wife is true, he can't sue for the rest. If I wrote in the Sunday Times that: "Anthony Butcher's name is Anthony Butcher, and he has been convicted of molesting goats and attempting to hold up the Wells Fargo Express whilst high on Heroin", would my comments about your name exonerate me from libel on the other 3 points? Of course not. He's on the ropes, isn't he! And what about the OLAF investigation? I think we deserve an explanation, otherwise how can we have any confidence or trust in Farage?