That a statement that is complained of is true is a defence against a libel
action but does not prevent that action from being brought.

Fair Comment is also a defence.

"Arabacle" is correct in her assertion.

"Walt Davidson" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 20:44:39 GMT, arabacle
wrote:
It says people who repeat libels are also guilty of libel.
For a statement to be libellous, it has to be untrue.

"Airy R. Bean, village idiot" wrung out her tampon in
message ...
That a statement that is complained of is true is a defence against a
libel
action but does not prevent that action from being brought.

A civil action can only be brought against a real person by another real
person.
'Airy R. Bean' is not a real person, it is a sock puppet name that anyone is
equally free to use.

Do you see Airy?
Airy is in the skool bike sheds sniffing the saddles.
Sniff Airy, sniff.

Do you see the plods?
Airy sees the plods.
The plods see Airy.
Run Airy, run.

Do you see the £350 law book?
Airy waves it at the plods.
The plods see the £350 law book.
Run plods, run.

Do you see the sheep?
Airy sees the sheep.
The sheep sees Airy.
Run sheep, run.

Do you see Airy's gum boots?
Airy needs them for the sheep.
Do you see Airy's marbles?
Neither does Airy.
Poor Airy, he's lost both his gum boots and his marbles.

See you in Court, tosser.
(___!___)

"Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI" wrote in message
...
See you in Court, tosser.
(___!___)

Frank is it me or have you enlarged the gluteas? ;-)

--

73s de Walter R.