b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 8197396 (Thread)

# ....


So does that mean Sullivan can sue them right back at a later... obviously if, allegedly, they were in onvolved, though I'm not for one minute suggesting they were... your honour
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:12, archived)
# Hahahhaha!
:D
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:13, archived)
# nice one sir.
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:13, archived)
# hahahaha!
aceness!!
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:13, archived)
# HAHAHA
Brilliant
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:13, archived)
# Hahaha!
Top stuff!
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:14, archived)
# £555,000
Don't tell Mills!!

Brill btw
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:16, archived)
# Ningles sir
I think my lack of sporting knowledge is letting me down on this one...
got any clues?
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:18, archived)
# Front page says sorry



Back page (which is usually sport in a newspaper)
has fingers crossed as if to say "ha ha, we're not sorry really"
Well that is what I believe the image to be about.
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:19, archived)
# just know that sport is the back page
So there's an apology on the front page and then...
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:20, archived)
# Good afternings
Front page says sorry.
Back page (which is usually sport in a newspaper)
has fingers crossed as if to say "ha ha, we're not sorry really"
Well that is what I believe the image to be about.

WTF! double postage!!!
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:20, archived)
# haha!~
/simpsons blog
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:23, archived)
# Hahahaha!
But I'm not surprised Chistmas lights have been banned it's EASTER!


(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:18, archived)
# Hahaha
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:18, archived)
# haha!
I thought this this morning. Normal libel cases require proof that libellous accusations are wrong. Since they've already eaten and shat her body, there's never going to be evidence, so in my opinion, there is no case to answer.
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:23, archived)
# Thing is
how can they prove that the daily Express libelled them, when it's not yet been proven that they were/were not involved...

Its very odd.
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:26, archived)
# they havemoney
and are therefore, right :)
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:30, archived)
# yeh, this is my problem
which is why it's such a shitty sum for such a big case.
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 16:36, archived)
#
Who has to provide the proof? If someone libels you, do you have to prove they're wrong, or do they have to prove they're right? I suspect the latter, hence the verdict.
(, Wed 19 Mar 2008, 17:01, archived)