GhostofPotvin29
New member
Dr. Bobby Leafer said:
It takes more than one drunken, crackhead mayor to change a lightbulb.
Mayor Rob Ford
- Thread starter Redleaf
- Start date
It takes more than one drunken, crackhead mayor to change a lightbulb.
bustaheims
Active member
Dr. Bobby Leafer said:
He just couldn't figure out why it wasn't working. I mean, the room was spinning, why wasn't the lightbulb?
Champ Kind
New member
Ok, now he's finally crossed the line
(*warning: graphic / vulger language in the article)
http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2013/11/14/rob_ford_admits_drinking_and_driving_says_hell_sue_former_staffers.html
(*warning: graphic / vulger language in the article)
http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2013/11/14/rob_ford_admits_drinking_and_driving_says_hell_sue_former_staffers.html
Champ Kind
New member
Zee said:
I just watched the associated video. What he said is absolutely outrageous, and in front of a huge scrum of journalists.
John Stewart is going to have a field day
Zee
Active member
I don't know how the law works, but can Ford sue for statements that were made to police during an investigation? Those people didn't run to the papers will allegations about Ford, it was during questioning by police. None of the allegations would have been made public had the documents not been released. Anyone with any legal knowledge care to comment?
bustaheims
Active member
Zee said:
I just read an article about that this morning, and, while he can file a lawsuit, it's highly unlikely he'd win. It's not libel/defamation of character if the statements being made by his staffers are either true or they have reasonable grounds to believe them to be true. On top of that, there's the fact that they were made as part of a police investigation - which means they were made in a situation where they would generally not be released to the public - and, as such, they may also be protected under absolute privilege.
The article can be found here: http://torontoist.com/2013/11/legal-analysis-can-rob-ford-sue-former-staffers-over-what-they-told-police/
EDIT: Also, this:
robyndoolittle: Shiller: I am offering to act for all of the proposed defendants in Mayor Ford?s anticipated lawsuit on a pro bono basis?.
So, if Ford does go through with this lawsuit, it appears as though the defendants won't have to concern themselves with legal fees, either.
OldTimeHockey
Active member
bustaheims said:
I believe Busta is correct.
I'd also think that defamation of character would only come into play if the charges were found to be untrue and he was found to be innocent. Then he may be able to say "you dragged my name through the mud"
bustaheims
Active member
OldTimeHockey said:
He's still unlikely to win in that case, as the comments were made to the police and not with the intention of them becoming public knowledge. It's a bit of a grey area since the police documents were released, but, my guess is those comments would still be protected under absolute privilege. Really, the only way I see Ford winning any lawsuit here is if he can somehow prove that some of these people lied to the cops with malicious intent, rather than making statements that they reasonably believed to be true.
dappleganger
Active member
Rob Ford:
Great Toronto Mayor?
Or
Greatest Toronto Mayor?
Or
Greatest Toronto Mayor?
Heroic Shrimp
New member
Rick said:
Et tu, Argos?
Zee
Active member
bustaheims said:
Thanks for that article, answered the question exactly as I suspected. I find it hard to believe he could win such a libel case when it's all part of an investigation and the comments were never made to the public, but instead to police. I suppose if Ford is somehow ultimately vindicated and proven innocent of all charges, he could sue the entire police force for ruining his reputation and career, but that's an entirely different matter.
hockeyfan1
New member
Zee said:
From the article:
In short: in any other situation, the staffers? statements to police would never have been released to the public and Rob Ford would have no grounds for a defamation claim, because there would be no damage to his reputation (if the statements were false) or the damage to his reputation would be necessary to protect the integrity of the justice system (if the statements were true and led to a criminal proceeding).
But because Rob Ford is the mayor, and because the contents of the ITO were released to the public, and because the Crown has not yet chosen to prosecute Rob Ford for a crime, it is possible for Rob Ford to sue his staffers for defamation. It?s just not very likely that he will succeed.
One would have to wonder, why would the staffers have made those statements to police without ruining their own integrity/reputations if they were false? It's pretty obvious the staffers concerns were legitimate.
Staffers/people would not have given falsifying statements/allegations without their reputation on the line or without any potential incoming repercussions. The fact that these were allegations based on what went on around Ford according to those who were around him, leads one to believe that they may be quite true.
The real liar here then is Rob Ford.
bustaheims
Active member
mc said:
As things stand right now - no, not without introducing new legislation.