http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22652083
Quote:
A tweet by Sally Bercow about Lord McAlpine has been ruled libellous by the High Court.
Mrs Bercow said she was "surprised and disappointed" by the ruling.
A subsequent High Court hearing will determine the damages she must pay.
After publishing her comment about Lord McAlpine, Mrs Bercow apologised in four subsequent tweets but denied that her original tweet had been defamatory.
The judge ruled that the tweet meant that the Conservative peer was a "paedophile who was guilty of sexually abusing boys living in care".
In a statement, Mrs Bercow responded: "I will accept the ruling as the end of the matter. I remain sorry for the distress I have caused Lord McAlpine and I repeat my apologies.
"I did not tweet this with malice, and I did not intend to libel Lord McAlpine. I was being conversational and mischievous, as was so often my style on Twitter.
"I very much regret my tweet, and I promptly apologised publicly and privately to Lord McAlpine for the distress I caused him. I also made two offers of compensation. Lord McAlpine issued proceedings and the last few months have been a nightmare. I am sure he has found it as stressful as I have. Litigation is not a pleasant experience for anyone.
"Today's ruling should be seen as a warning to all social media users. Things can be held to be seriously defamatory, even when you do not intend them to be defamatory and do not make any express accusation. On this, I have learned my own lesson the hard way."
|
I suspect that, precedent having been established, such cases will become more prevalent - what goes on social media can end up in the High Court .....
