big hack attack

[Bob]

Ive been involved in a couple of these, and for the most part, due to
the unreliability of email (spoofing etc), email rarely is admissable.
Bob

Greg Johnson wrote:

> "Mullen, Shaun" <mullens at phillynews.com> wrote:
>
> >Fellow listers:
> >
> >It would be impolitic to suggest that the never-f*cking-ending
> thread on Mr.
> >Hack come to an end.  I won't do that, although a powerful case
> has been
> >made over the last few weeks in dozens of messages that the
> concept of
> >caveat emptor is as pertinent today as ever -- if not more so.
> >
> .A cautionary note:  Several of you have suggested that Mr. Hack
> cries
> >"slander" when it suits him.  I have substantial experience in
> the world of
> >libel/slander law.  Mr. Hack's threats are not necessarily
> empty, and it
> >would be a gosh darned shame if any of us had to sell our
> precious quattros
> >in order to fend off a slander or libel suit.
>
> True, one needs to be very careful about what one says in a
> public forum.  On the other hand, in any lawsuit, the plaintiff
> bears the burden of proving libel and/or slander.  Further, the
> truth is an absolute defense.  Hence, if the person who has
> stated things about the plaintiff personally knows that they are
> in fact true, then there is no liability.  Hence, one needs to be
> very careful about what is said, and one has to know it to be
> true.  Passing along heresay will not create a truth defense.
>
> My .$02
>
> Greg J