[Marmalite]

Originally Posted by alex_front2

Family declining to comment. HHmmm. If someone told tales about my loved one I'd defend the truth and if serious sue. Oh well

Defend something written in the Daily Star?

Takes all kinds I suppose!

[CaudleHalbard]

Originally Posted by Marmalite

Defend something written in the Daily Star?

Takes all kinds I suppose!

Serious question: do you think Sam will take libel action against the DS when he gets out?

He could get more than the BB prize fund if the DS has printed an untruth.

If you think he won't, you have to ask yourself why not!

[Marmalite]

Originally Posted by CaudleHalbard

Serious question: do you think Sam will take libel action against the DS when he gets out?

He could get more than the BB prize fund if the DS has printed an untruth.

If you think he won't, you have to ask yourself why not!

Don't know and don't care. Just the same as I don't care about any of the other HM's and what low life journalist from the Daily Star make up.... sorry....write about them after they've left the house.

Maybe he will and maybe he won't because he couldn't be arsed?

But he's not out yet, and by the time he is and BB is all over, everyone will forget anyway.... I'm certainly not going to check up on whether he did or didn't that's up to him. But you can if you want to.

Just want to add - somebody worked out that this was quite an old article. Maybe they have given a comment but because of the situation (eviction/betting) Daily Star have chosen not to include it?

[CaudleHalbard]

Originally Posted by Marmalite

maybe he won't because he couldn't be arsed?

LMAO! Couldn't be arsed...... for probably tens of thousands? Oh come on! Sam would just need to get a 'no win - no fee' lawyer and he could be quids in.

What about the publican quoted? Have the DS lied about what he said? If so, he too could take libel action.

Sorry but there is only one conclusion: it may be in the Daily Star but there is no way that rag's lawyers would let an article like this be printed if it wasn't provable.

[Marmalite]

Originally Posted by CaudleHalbard

LMAO! Couldn't be arsed...... for probably tens of thousands? Oh come on! Sam would just need to get a 'no win - no fee' lawyer and he could be quids in.

What about the publican quoted? Have the DS lied about what he said? If so, he too could take libel action.

Sorry but there is only one conclusion: it may be in the Daily Star but there is no way that rag's lawyers would let an article like this be printed if it wasn't provable.

So then maybe Sam will get a no win no fee lawyer or maybe he won't. What the **** does it have to do with me? You asked me I responded in the manner I saw fit.

Why don't you persue this for your own gratification? Don't forget to get Sam's version of the story as well though, you know to be fair and all that. You have to wait though as he's currently in the BB house as you know. But because of this smear campaign (which may or may not be 100% true and full of accurate facts) you just may not have to wait too much longer.

In this world there are journalists and then there are twonks who think they are journalists because they ask a couple of questions, get a couple of names and then stretch the truth to fit their needs at the time and pay off the victim once the newpaper or magazine reaps the profits.