In today's Irish Times, Legal Affairs Editor Carol Coulter writes this piece: Man seeks apology over paper's claim of relationship
The article concerns Barry Watters who is serving a sentence for possession of child pornography (see: Guilty plea to child porn possession) and who has brought a case against the Star on Sunday newspaper under the Defamation Act 2009 where a claimant can seek a court order to publish a correction in a newspaper without claiming damages.
According to the Irish Time's article the Star on Sunday story was:
entitled “Larry’s Secret Shower Buddy” which, according to an affidavit filed on behalf of Watters, “purports to be an exposé of a relationship quite clearly presented as being sexual in nature between our client and Mr Larry Murphy, a recently released and extremely high profile convict.”
While evidence was presented to the court that Watters had had no relationship with Murphy The Star on Sunday's defence does not rest on addressing whether Watter's had a relationship with Larry Murphy or not but rather simply on whether it damaged Watter's reputation.
Judge Joseph Matthews said the plaintiff had been associated with a sensational name, described as “the beast of Baltinglass”. Mr McCullough [counsel for the Star] said it did not matter whether the alleged relationship was with a person with a good or a bad reputation.
Asked whether he was saying allegations concerning a relationship with Murphy could have no relevance given what had gone before, Mr McCullough said: “Yes. Defamation is not about particular facts and whether they are precisely true. The question becomes – is his reputation any worse as a result of the publication? He is a social pariah.”
I am a convicted sex offender. I know my reputation is as low as anyone's can be and that I am a social pariah, evidence of that is about me everyday. Arguably my reputation is so low that cannot be damaged any further. However, while I am not surprised, I find it bizarre that journalists can think it is OK because of that to make up fictitious stories about me and publish them as fact to entertain potential readers.
Whatever about the law on defamation, I cannot see that spreading untruths about sex offenders, or anyone else, can be in the public interest.
0 comments:
Post a Comment