OT: Unorthodox cat keeping

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

fed up with cat shit.

[ARWadsworth]

I suspect that she will soon be fed up of all the shit she gets now that she has been named.

[Toby]

Now she gets police protection

[dennis]

I hope that she sues whomever posted the video. Its illegal to post a video that defames a person and that does.

[ARWadsworth]

> is being guarded by PCSOs.

Here's one for Grimly with PCSOs in it.

[ARWadsworth]

How did the people who made the CCTV recording defame the woman?

[dennis]

[ARWadsworth]

They posted the original and then the newspapers and TV got in on the act.

TBH I cannot see anything defamatory in the video that you saw.

[Jim K]

class! ;>))))

nice one Jim K

[ARWadsworth]

and a few short ones

?v=OCN-WRG3e2o&feature=related

[Jim K]

of course not, what there appears to be, is *evidence* of the woman's actions, not an unsubstantiated malicious claim of what her actions were....

Jim K

[The Wanderer]

*You* are not living in a parallel universe.....

[Man at B&Q]

Try looking up the word defame in a dictionary.

MBQ

[Andy Dingley]

Somehow I knew that was Dennis before I even read the header.

So we can assume that you support the rights of cat torturers? Congratulations, you've made it to being lower than the Daily Mail.

[Dave Starling]

That woman needs her head testing and will probably claim she had a moment of madness. But she can't have had any conscience otherwise she would have gone back at night and lifted the lid and nobody would have be any wiser. It was extremely cruel given the lids fit snugly and the poor cat must have been almost asphixiated.

I haven't seen this report yet on the UK channels;

[ARWadsworth]

I have just worked out why Dennis is so upset about the video.

The woman put the cat into the wrong coloured wheelie bin. That's enough to send anyone with special needs into a frenzy.

Adam

[dennis]

Why don't you?

Here is an extract as you don't appear to be able to..

"to attack the good name or reputation of, as by uttering or *publishing maliciously* or falsely anything injurious;"

Here is a quick explanation just in case its too hard for you to understand.. Just because its true doesn't mean you can't be sued for attacking the good name of an individual. That is what the video does.

The law that allows you to photograph or film someone in a public place specifically forbids using it to disrepute someone.

But you are pretty stupid so you won't understand.

[Andy Dingley]

Of course not. Quite rightly (as robust access to fair courts is a cornerstone of a democratic system), you can approach the court to sue for anything you wish (although in your case, I imagine there's a good chance you've already been termed a vexatious litigant). Equally rightly, such a case should be thrown out promptly as having no merit. Truth doesn't prevent the bringing of a suit for defamation, but it's a strong defence against it.

[Bob Eager]

LOL! But true...

[ARWadsworth]

de·fame

-verb (used with object), -famed, -fam·ing.

1. to attack the good name or reputation of, as by uttering or publishing maliciously or falsely anything injurious; slander or libel; calumniate: The newspaper editorial defamed the politician.

Now look up the words "maliciously" and "falsely"