Comments by "" (@charliemoore2551) on "Labour could change our libel laws" video.

I think that libelling or slandering someone in order to damage others' perception of them can be as hurtful and injurious as physical attack. It should be treated as a crime and prosecuted by the state. The current law means that, on the one hand, rich individuals can evade not only criticism but proper investigation for actual crimes: Think Savile, Maxwell, Archer. On the other hand, if ordinary people are lied about they are deterred from seeking redress by the deep pockets of the likes of the individuals above - as well as the rest of the press, of course. A law of criminal libel/slander would correct this imbalance.
3
Yes. All the law you can afford to buy.
2
@user-xu5vl5th9n And people who think like you have probably never been abused then silenced by Savile. I said nothing about morality and the example of "affairs" is too ridiculous to answer.
1
@user-xu5vl5th9n No. It wasn't libel laws per se which protected him. It was the fact that he had deep enough pockets to finance a case and the prospective defendants would have been financially unable to fight. If libel was a criminal offence, Savile would have had to go to the police to report the libel and it would have been up to the Crown Prosecution Service to examine the evidence on both sides. Instead of fighting a multi-millionaire celeb at their own expense, the defendants would have been defending themselves against a state charge with Legal Aid. An entirely different contest. That, of course, assumes that the CPS decided that Savile had a case in the first place. I suspect that the prospect of a proper investigation by the authorities would have kept him well away from HM constabulary. And that is the point!
1