Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Jared O'Mara - remember him* - has been charged with seven counts of fraud by false representation with regard to parliamentary expenses.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... s-of-fraud

*Ex-MP for Sheffield Hallam, 2017-2019. Corbynite and Momentumite, parachuted into the constituency by the then Corbyn-dominated NEC. Great character checking, Len...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_O%27Mara

The Independent is reporting that the Mail has lost another stage in the Meghan Markle privacy case:

The publisher of the Mail on Sunday has lost a legal battle to overturn a High Court ruling on its publication of a letter written by Meghan Markle to her estranged father.

From Sky News:

The Duchess of Sussex says a "precedent" had been set after the publisher of the Mail on Sunday was denied its request for a trial over claims it breached her copyright and privacy.

It follows the publication of excerpts of a letter written by Meghan to her father.

The Duchess said in a statement: "This is a victory not just for me, but for anyone who has ever felt scared to stand up for what's right.

"While this win is precedent setting, what matters most is that we are now collectively brave enough to reshape a tabloid industry that conditions people to be cruel, and profits from the lies and pain that they create."

She added: "From day one, I have treated this lawsuit as an important measure of right versus wrong. The defendant has treated it as a game with no rules.

"The longer they dragged it out, the more they could twist facts and manipulate the public (even during the appeal itself), making a straightforward case extraordinarily convoluted in order to generate more headlines and sell more newspapers-a model that rewards chaos above truth.

"In the nearly three years since this began, I have been patient in the face of deception, intimidation, and calculated attacks."

Seeking to widen the argument, Meghan said: "As far removed as it may seem from your personal life, it's not. Tomorrow it could be you. These harmful practices don't happen once in a blue moon - they are a daily fail that divide us, and we all deserve better."

Meghan, 40, sued Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) - publisher of the Mail on Sunday - over five articles which reproduced parts of a letter she sent to her father, Thomas Markle, in August 2018.

The duchess won her case earlier this year when a High Court judge ruled in her favour without a full trial - on the basis that ANL's publication of the letter was unlawful.

But ANL appealed and argued during a three-day hearing last month that the case should go to trial on Meghan's claims - including breach of privacy and copyright.

The court was told the duchess' letter was "written with public consumption in mind as a possibility".

Jason Knauf, who was Prince Harry and Meghan's media adviser until March 2019, said "the duchess indicated in messages to me that she recognised that it was possible that Mr Markle would make the letter public".

In the judgment published on Thursday, the Court of Appeal assessed whether the previous judgment had been correct.

It upheld the decision that the duchess had a "reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of the letter".

It added: "These contents were personal, private, and not matters of legitimate public interest."

Quite apart from the delightful thought that Dacre is probably turning puce as we speak, the downside is that now as far as the Mail is concerned, the gloves are off. They'll go after her with a ferocity even greater than now.

Personally, I think she's a hero.

She *is* a hero.

a tabloid industry that conditions people to be cruel, and profits from the lies and pain that they create."

This is absolutely spot-on.

It won't worry them. Sarah Vine's got a column ready to go about what a two faced bitch Markle is, and just like the Leveson enquiry they'll gleefully reprint everything they can while the readers ignore that it was their paper that did all that shit in the first place.

That turd nugget Dan Wooton bangs on about her nearly every night on gammon news, and she's a regular topic on the gammon-baiting Jeremy Vine Show so I imagine they'll dine on this for ages.

That's the thing though. The haters are cast iron in their beliefs, like your anti-vaxxer or ultra Brexiteer - nothing you can say can sway them from their prejudice. They'll say things like "The Queen is heartbroken and doesn't speak to them" - how do they know exactly? Or a good one is "Harry's a fool, she clearly means more to him than we do" - and the problem with that is what?

Hang on, wasn't there something in the original judgement that the MoS has to print a front page apology? Or am I more confused than usual?

I love the fact that the Mail on Sunday is now thinking of taking it to the Supreme Court. I didn't think the Mail were keen on Judges.

satnav wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 6:44 pm I love the fact that the Mail on Sunday is now thinking of taking it to the Supreme Court. I didn't think the Mail were keen on Judges.

Wouldn't it be great if Bothermere and Facre marched into the court in person: Fucking and Cunting their way to the front.
Then looked up, and saw those three Judges sat there in that precise order.

Never mind, I'm sure there'll be a measured and mature reflection and..

Oh, never mind.

Also, you have to laugh at them blubbing about a free press when they've just canned an editor for being too critical of the government.

Bloody hell - IPSO have found against Mail Online for egregious untruths. And racist dogwhistles.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/ ... ite-people

Mail Online, the online edition of the Daily Mail, has been heavily censured by the press standards regulator for publishing an article referring to “British towns that are no-go areas for white people”.

The title’s defence – that no reasonable person was likely to take the claim seriously – was dismissed by the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso).

“The headline claim that there were ‘British towns that are no-go areas for white people’ was not supported by the article. The article included no reference to a town or towns which were claimed to be off-limits to white people, and only one area within a city was described as a ‘no-go area’ for white people,” the organisation said.

They're telling their readers they think they're fucking morons and...

The title’s defence – that no reasonable person was likely to take the claim seriously – was dismissed by the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso).

RedSparrows wrote:They're telling their readers they think they're fucking morons and...

The title’s defence – that no reasonable person was likely to take the claim seriously – was dismissed by the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso).

That says to me that IPSO don't think reasonable people read the Fail, which is pretty much the impression I get from having to interact with Fail readers.

It defies belief that the Mail's defence is that their take on such an important topic wouldn't be taken seriously.

The Fox News/Alex Jones defence.

Gaze upon the bottom of the page....

Handy timing. I bet their circulation takes a hit on Boxing Day

Maxwell guilty on 5 of 6 charges.

Is randy Andy sweating yet?