Goodness Gracious, Freddie lost ! Not surprising when one reads the Judgement, here it is !
Now Guys and gals, I'm going to go through this thing the best I can. I will only consider the legal arguments only as much as I understand them. I only attended ONE day (4 hours) at the closing submissions stage of the case, but I do have my notes and I do recall some things that were said that will stick in my mind.
As I sat there listening to words like 'pleadings', 'amended' applications, I started to wonder if Freddie had been let down by his own legal team.
Let's look at the judgement which sets out the background to the application
'He accepted that this part of the claimant's case could not succeed' ?
I remember a discussion about just how many people would have read that e-book. No one actually knew, that is, no one appears to have asked either Ms Ward or the site administrators, about viewing figures. I know my viewing figures, but never mind eh.
Poor Freddie must have felt very confused in the middle of these chaps in wigs, citing this that and the other caselaw. This defence and that, for slander, libel, etc etc.
One thing I was completely confused about was the fact that Freddie had not sued the BBC and ITV ! Ms Ward's 'words' started life online, but they ended up on ITV news, via BBC journalists.
So, what do you think ? Could Karin Ward have reasonably foresaw the USE of her interview being used and reused or republished, by various media outlets ?
Freddie's legals had obviously not seen Meirion Jones' 'script' because he at least, certainly intended to use her 'words' did he not ?
Not crossed examined why not ?
'Dossier' now I remember their being some question as to whether Thomas used this word to Ward
Why so vague about such an important fact as to an interviewee's approval to broadcast ? In any event, if she didn't approve, she shouldn't have done the interview on camera in the first place.
I feel sorry for Freddie it seems he's been stuffed all ways. I'll cover his testimony and, more importantly, that of the two women called to give evidence for and against the defendant, next time.