,
10 tweets,
6 min read
Read on Twitter
This is a rather sinister statement from @TiceRichard ("Others take note") which has to be read as seeking to suppress criticism of the Brexit Party.
But what's the story behind the tweet? /THREAD
But what's the story behind the tweet? /THREAD
Here, from a letter published by @brexitparty_uk () are the words uttered by Aly Smith MEP.
You'll note they are criticisms of the Brexit Party not of @TiceRichard. /1
You'll note they are criticisms of the Brexit Party not of @TiceRichard. /1
And here is an extract from the statement @TiceRichard has released.
Smith has apologised, properly, for allegation of money laundering for which he has no evidence. But not for calling the Brexit Party "shysters" or "lawbreakers" or pointing out it's funded by dark money. /2
Smith has apologised, properly, for allegation of money laundering for which he has no evidence. But not for calling the Brexit Party "shysters" or "lawbreakers" or pointing out it's funded by dark money. /2
You will recall that the Electoral Commission shares some of the concerns that Alyn Smith has expressed (electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journal…). /3
Indeed, the apology demanded by @TiceRichard's letter does not extend to the other statements made by Alyn Smith. /4
You'll also note that although Alyn Smith's words were spoken about the Brexit Party, the Brexit Party wasn't threatening to sue. Instead @TiceRichard was. /5
The reason why @brexitparty_uk can't sue can be seen in a case called Goldsmith v Bhoyrul [1998] QB 459.
So @TiceRichard sought to protect Brexit Party from criticism by suing in his own name. But the Brexit Party published both the threat to sue Alyn Smith and his apology. /6
So @TiceRichard sought to protect Brexit Party from criticism by suing in his own name. But the Brexit Party published both the threat to sue Alyn Smith and his apology. /6
The reason why this is so important can be seen from this extract: "Any attempt to stifle such criticism amounts to political censorship of the most insidious and objectionable kind" (bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/…). /7
Not for me to speculate publicly on why Alyn Smith has folded - but it seems to me vanishingly unlikely that @TiceRichard would have won his action. The reasons why can be seen in the case of Tilbrook v Parr (bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/…). /8
In other words - despite the Brexit Party's attempt to suppress criticism of its highly dubious and I think illegal funding practices - you can safely crack on and subject them to proper scrutiny.
Don't be bullied into quiet by the mega-wealthy and their libel lawyers. /ENDS
Don't be bullied into quiet by the mega-wealthy and their libel lawyers. /ENDS
