Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Miller who wrote (29947)	4/14/1999 9:31:00 AM
From: Mama Bear	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Richard, I believe you are mistaken about this. Perhaps you can give some examples of when someone was held liable for damages in a libel case for telling the truth? Barb

To: Richard Miller who wrote (29947)	4/14/1999 9:34:00 AM
From: The Street	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

<<With all due respect, if you tell the truth, and it is with malicious intent about a private person it could be libelous.<< That is one of the stupidest comments I have ever seen....

To: Richard Miller who wrote (29947)	4/14/1999 10:14:00 AM
From: Mama Bear	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 122087

Richard, here is something I found in an Internet search concerning truth as a defense to libel: rcfp.org "Opinion is still protected speech under the First Amendment, although the Supreme Court limited the formerly broad reach of opinion protection in Milkovich v. Lorain Journal. 13 The court ruled that there is no separate opinion privilege, but because factual truth is a defense to a libel claim, an opinion with no "provably false factual connotation" is still protected." Barb