Slick Vic Should Sue Helen For Slander

[Lister of Smeg]

Telling lies about the slick man is not on :nono:

[DrunkerThanMoses]

didnt danny bring it up?

[Denver]

As I said she never mentioned his name so he can't prove anything

[Marsh.]

He'll have to sell a hell of a lot of coke for the court fees.

[rusticgal]

She should be kicked out for her comments...it was an appalling thing to say and undefendable.
They have thrown others out for far less...

[joeysteele]

The option is open for him to sue her if she is wrong for sure.
She has said it on a public show,if he can disprove it,then he has the evidence she said it.

[Absorption]

I imagine the production team was torn between their "TV gold" and the prospect of legal action. I'm not sure that the lack of his name would be enough defence given the context of the conversation.

[Lstan]

Nah
talking about him has extended his 15 minutes of fame,
which was 45 minutes too long to begin with

[Denver]

If he was to sue her wouldn't he have to take a drug test? Therefore if any drugs are found in his system it would be thrown out of court

[smudgie]

The fact that she has backtracked and said she knows no such thing really should strengthen his case somewhat.

[Lister of Smeg]

I imagine the production team was torn between their "TV gold" and the prospect of legal action. I'm not sure that the lack of his name would be enough defence given the context of the conversation.

Exactly he definitely has a case not out right saying his name isn't enough of a defence against when she was quite clearly talking about him.

[GypsyGoth]

It was BB's choice or rather C5's choice to show it. There is loads of libelous stuff said by the housemates, it's up to C5 BB not to broadcast it. So I think they are the ones at fault, not Helen.

[Lister of Smeg]

The fact that she has backtracked and said she knows no such thing really should strengthen his case somewhat.

Exactly she was talking out of her arse while dragging someone else's name through the dirt :nono:

[Rob!]

He is :joker: check his Twitter :hehe:

[Lister of Smeg]

It was BB's choice or rather C5's choice to show it. There is loads of libelous stuff said by the housemates, it's up to C5 BB not to broadcast it. So I think they are the ones at fault, not Helen.

It came out of Helen's mouth she should be made to live with the consequences if it is a complete lie.

[GiRTh]

The option is open for him to sue her if she is wrong for sure.
She has said it on a public show,if he can disprove it,then he has the evidence she said it.The burden of proof lies with him if he sues her. Anyway its another in a long line of misdemeanors by this poisonous ******. Hopefully this one will finish her for good cuz if he wins then I hope he cleans her out.

[sampvt]

To sue Helen for those comments he must first prove he is innocent and that could be hard given his track record. I doubt he would want to go there as skeletons might start falling out if he has dabbled and someone knows about it, who knows but normally there is no smoke without fire.

[Lister of Smeg]

He is :joker: check his Twitter :hehe:
Good :laugh:

[Lister of Smeg]

To sue Helen for those comments he must first prove he is innocent and that could be hard given his track record. I doubt he would want to go there as skeletons might start falling out if he has dabbled and someone knows about it, who knows but normally there is no smoke without fire.

Hard to prove ? All he has to do is take a drugs test .

[Denver]

Hard to prove ? All he has to do is take a drugs test .

A drugs test which with any type of drug found would be thrown out of court

[GiRTh]

To sue Helen for those comments he must first prove he is innocent and that could be hard given his track record. I doubt he would want to go there as skeletons might start falling out if he has dabbled and someone knows about it, who knows but normally there is no smoke without fire.This. All Helen has to do is pick holes in his case. She doesnt have to prove anything even though she said it on TV.

[Amy Jade]

As I said she never mentioned his name so he can't prove anything

Yes she did lol

[Absorption]

Exactly she was talking out of her arse while dragging someone else's name through the dirt :nono:

Nawww, she was just "sayin' it like it is"...or maybe it was 'banter'... :joker:

[karezza]

Only if what she said is true.

[GiRTh]

The exact quote was - He can ******ing die for all I care'. What a peach eh?

[jegmeister]

This. All Helen has to do is pick holes in his case. She doesnt have to prove anything even though she said it on TV.You don't understand the law it seems. She has made the libellous comments so she must prove them or withdraw them.

[bots]

You don't understand the law it seems. She has made the libellous comments so she must prove them or withdraw them.

Not strictly true, you can say anything you like about someone provided it is factually correct. In this instance, Victor would be taking action against Helen, and would therefore have to prove that what she said was false

[Beetlejuice]

The fact that she has backtracked and said she knows no such thing really should strengthen his case somewhat.

Did she backtrack?

[Rob!]

@VicEbuwaSlick: Can somebody say - DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER �������� Thanks #bbHelen, you just spent your appearance fee on me ������������ #bbuk

[Lampfan]

I loved the slick.

He does what I'd expect.

[Lister of Smeg]

@VicEbuwaSlick: Can somebody say - DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER �������� Thanks #bbHelen, you just spent your appearance fee on me ������������ #bbuk

:joker::dance:

[reece(:]

As I said she never mentioned his name so he can't prove anything
It's on camera ffs :laugh:

[Rob!]

Perched for the Judge Rinder episode :flutter:

[Colbert-Bump]

xFwdSLINT8o

[JTM45]

A drugs test which with any type of drug found would be thrown out of court

Absolutely incorrect!:nono:

You cannot be found guilty of posession of a drug if it is found in your system (blood, urine or hair sample).

If they were testing him to determine whether he had cocaine in his system they could use a positive test to say he has recently used the drug but any other drug found in his system would be completely ignored as it's irrelevant to the case and, as i said earlier, it wouldn't be a crime anyway (unless he was driving at the time).

She was obviously talking about Victor in the initial comment which she even confirmed when they called her into the diary room. Even if she hadn't confirmed it in the DR even the most basic prosecutor could convince a Judge/Jury who she was refering to.

If he really wants to do it he'd have an excellent case (unless there's prior documented evidence, which is unlikely).

[Rorkimaru]

Did she say he dealt or that he was a cokehead? Like if the onus is on him to prove that he has never taken cocaine that'll be a difficult thing to do.

[billy123]

How do you still not see. http://ukvapers.org/images/smilies/Pack1/smiley26.gif
IT ISNT REAL IT IS AN ENTERTAINMENT SHOW SET IN A TV STUDIO.

[Kazanne]

He is :joker: check his Twitter :hehe:

All mouth me thinks,Victors as dodgy as they come:hehe:

[ebandit]

........helen should be made to share her stash................

but seriously who gives a **** what helen says............i would not give a ****

if she were to ***

Mark L

[karezza]

This was Big Brother's revenge on Victor.

[little.lilly]

It's the show that should be sued for airing it. The HM's probably say a lot of things they shouldn't. It's the productions teams jobs to edit it out.

[kistar]

Absolutely incorrect!:nono:

You cannot be found guilty of posession of a drug if it is found in your system (blood, urine or hair sample).

If they were testing him to determine whether he had cocaine in his system they could use a positive test to say he has recently used the drug but any other drug found in his system would be completely ignored as it's irrelevant to the case and, as i said earlier, it wouldn't be a crime anyway (unless he was driving at the time).

She was obviously talking about Victor in the initial comment which she even confirmed when they called her into the diary room. Even if she hadn't confirmed it in the DR even the most basic prosecutor could convince a Judge/Jury who she was refering to.

If he really wants to do it he'd have an excellent case (unless there's prior documented evidence, which is unlikely).


So hope he takes it all the way.:joker:

[Chuckyegg]

Cokeheads are unbearable and gobby. Victor is neither of those. pffffffff

[smudgie]

Did she backtrack?

APparently, according to Emma we will see it on tonight's show.