BBC, lots more: In Britain, so-called libelous science writer Singh has the legal winds at his back. For a change.

Republish
0 Comments

In a reassuring sign that while the British legal system may be dense and silly-sounding at times it is however not entirely daft, science writer Simon Singh has won his appeal to a previous ruling that he could well have libeled Britain’s chiropractors when he wrote that they happily provide bogus treatments.

This is not necessarily the end of his difficulties with the British Chiropractic Association. But the ruling does declare that his words fall into the category of fair comment – that is, a personal opinion that chiropractic is unscientific rather than an attack on the characters of the joint-crackers by saying they not only peddle nonsense but that they know it’s a scam. Thus he has a far friendlier playing field should the game go on.

The BBC article is quite something. It is written, naturally enough, for people who have some idea how the UK and its laws work and who does the working. The Tracker ergo has no idea how to nod and trot along while reading this: “…the Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge, Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger, and Lord Justice Sedley ruled High Court judge Mr. Justice Eady had … ”  Oh. You don’t say! Plus, it goes on to tell us, Singh’s high-profile supporters include Stephen Fry, Ricky Gervais, and Harry Hill…”  Again, do say! Who they?

Congrats to Mr. Singh, good luck with the rest of an affair that already has cost you a good deal of  time and fortune.

Other Stories:

Grist for the Mill: Simonsingh.net ;

Charlie Petit