How does Clive get to use private messages between McGowan and others in
the trial?
Blind Freddy can see this is an abuse of legal process. All sorts of
garbage that has little to do with the original premise of defamation is
dragged in; the purpose is to damage a Labor premier and advantage the
Cane Toad's own political party.
Is the judge asleep at the wheel???

Telly Savalas wrote:
================
>
> How does Clive get to use private messages between McGowan and others in
> the trial?

** Why not?

> Blind Freddy can see this is an abuse of legal process.

** Why?

FYI:

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages

> All sorts of
> garbage that has little to do with the original premise of defamation is
> dragged in;

** Looks like strong evidence of defamation to most normal people.

Or do you ( wrongly) imagine that defamation must be published in the media ?

> the purpose is to damage a Labor premier and advantage the
> Cane Toad's own political party.

** How ?

> Is the judge asleep at the wheel???

** Nope - but you are.
Asleep in a forest while unaware of any trees.

.......... Phil

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
> Telly Savalas wrote

>> How does Clive get to use private messagesbetween McGowan and others in
>> the trial?

> Why not?

Because that is no better than the court being able
to look at his personal correspondence, stupid.

>> Blind Freddy can see this is an abuse of legal process.

> Why?

See above, stupid.

> FYI:

> https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages

That's not PUBLISHING, stupid.

>> All sorts of
>> garbage that has little to do with the original premise of defamation is
>> dragged in;

> Looks like strong evidence of defamation to most normal people.

Only those like you that don't have a fucking
clue about what defamation actually is.

> Or do you ( wrongly) imagine that defamation must be published in the
> media ?

Nothing wrongly about it, fuckwit.

>> the purpose is to damage a Labor premier andadvantage the Cane Toad's
>> own political party.

> How ?

By winning that civil suit, fuckwit.

>> Is the judge asleep at the wheel???

> Nope - but you are.

We'll see...

> Asleep in a forest while unaware of any trees.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychoitic dole
bludger fantasys.

Rod Speed is is 100% WRONG AGAIN :

=============================
>
> >> How does Clive get to use private messages between McGowan and others in
> >> the trial?
>
>
> > https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages
>
> That's not PUBLISHING, stupid.

** Yes it is - FUCKWIT

> >> All sorts of
> >> garbage that has little to do with the original premise of defamation is
> >> dragged in;
> > Looks like strong evidence of defamation to most normal people.
> Only those like you that don't have a fucking
> clue about what defamation actually is.

** ROTFL - like Rod FUCKING SPEED !!!

> > Or do you ( wrongly) imagine that defamation must be published in the
> > media ?
> Nothing wrongly about it, fuckwit.

** Totally - 100% fucking WRONG !!!!!!!!.

FYI you pig ignorant, fucking shithead:

In defamation law " publishing " = informing another person.
Damages can be awarded for "loss of opportunity" as well as financial and reputation loss.

....... Phil

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>>>> How does Clive get to use private messages betweenMcGowan and others
>>>> in the trial?

>> https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages

>> That's not PUBLISHING, stupid.

> Yes it is

Bullshit it is any more than his personal correspondence is.

>>>> All sorts of garbage that has little to do with theoriginal premise
>>>> of defamation is dragged in;

>>> Looks like strong evidence of defamation to most normal people.

>> Only those like you that don't have a fucking
>> clue about what defamation actually is.

>>> Or do you ( wrongly) imagine that defamationmust be published in the
>>> media ?

>> Nothing wrongly about it, fuckwit.

> Damages can be awarded for "loss of opportunity"as well as financial
> and reputation loss.

McGowan has caused neither with Palmer, fuckwit.

BIGGEST LIAR on Earth = Rod Speed wrote:

=====================================
>
> >>>> How does Clive get to use private messages betweenMcGowan and others
> >>>> in the trial?
>
> >> https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages
>
> >> That's not PUBLISHING, stupid.

> > Yes it is !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Bullshit it is any more than his personal correspondence is.
>

** No such exclusion exists - how you defame someone is of no consequence.

Lawyers all know that, the court is accepting the evidence here and it will count.

...... Phil

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>>>>>> How does Clive get to use private messages between
>>>>>> McGowan and others in the trial?

>> >>
>> https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages

>>>> That's not PUBLISHING, stupid.

>> > Yes it is !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>> Bullshit it is any more than his personal correspondence is.

> No such exclusion exists

But his lawyers didn't get access to his personal correspondence, fuckwit.

> how you defame someone is of no consequence.

Wrong, as always.

> Lawyers all know that, the court is accepting the evidence here and it
> will count.

Bullshit it will, you watch. The most Palmer might get is derisory
damages given that he can't extablish he has experienced any
financial or reputational damage from anything McGowan has
said and everything McGowan has said is absolutely correct.

Some Fuckwit posting as Rod Speed wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >>>> That's not PUBLISHING, stupid.
>
> >> > Yes it is !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> >> Bullshit it is any more than his personal correspondence is.
>>
> > No such exclusion exists
>
> But his lawyers didn't get access to his personal correspondence,

** Funny how the words are all being read out in court.

> > how you defame someone is of no consequence.
>
> Wrong, as always.

** ROTFLMAO - Rod has no FUCKING CLUE, AT ALL !!!

> > Lawyers all know that, the court is accepting the evidence here and it
> > will count.

** Rod has no FUCKING CLUE, AT ALL !!!

Yawwwwnnnnnnnnn....

...... Phil

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> >>>> That's not PUBLISHING, stupid.
>>
>> >> > Yes it is !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> >> Bullshit it is any more than his personal correspondence is.
>>>
>> > No such exclusion exists
>>
>> But his lawyers didn't get access to his personal correspondence,

> Funny how the words are all being read out in court.

The PERSONAL CORRESPONDANCE isn't fuckwit.

>>> how you defame someone is of no consequence.

>> Wrong, as always.

The Speedbot has it arms flaying about and its head spinning around.

==================================================
> >> >>>> That's not PUBLISHING, stupid.
> >>
> >> >> > Yes it is !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >>
> >> >> Bullshit it is any more than his personal correspondence is.
> >>>
> >> > No such exclusion exists
> >>
> >> But his lawyers didn't get access to his personal correspondence,
>
> > Funny how the words are all being read out in court.

> The PERSONAL CORRESPONDANCE isn't fuckwit.

** Course it is, you lying TWAT .

> >>> how you defame someone is of no consequence.
>
> >> Wrong, as always.

** 1000% correct as ALWAYS.

FOAD, ASAP.

On 10/03/2022 9:42 am, Phil Allison wrote:
> Telly Savalas wrote:
> ================
>>
>> How does Clive get to use private messages between McGowan and others in
>> the trial?
>
> ** Why not?
>
>> Blind Freddy can see this is an abuse of legal process.
>
> ** Why?
>
> FYI:
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages
>
>
>> All sorts of
>> garbage that has little to do with the original premise of defamation is
>> dragged in;
>
> ** Looks like strong evidence of defamation to most normal people.
>
> Or do you ( wrongly) imagine that defamation must be published in the media ?
>

It is not defamation to say something defamatory to only the person
being defamed. It must be said to someone else.

>
>> the purpose is to damage a Labor premier and advantage the
>> Cane Toad's own political party.
>
> ** How ?
>
>> Is the judge asleep at the wheel???
>
> ** Nope - but you are.
> Asleep in a forest while unaware of any trees.
>
>
> ......... Phil

Some drug crazed drunken dole bludger claiming to be
Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> spewed the shit
you'd expect from a drunk drug crazed dole bludger.

Max the Fucking IDIOT wrote:
======================
>>
> >> How does Clive get to use private messages between McGowan and others in
> >> the trial?
> >
> > https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages
> >
>
> > ** Looks like strong evidence of defamation to most normal people.
> >
> > Or do you ( wrongly) imagine that defamation must be published in the media ?
> >
> It is not defamation to say something defamatory to only the person
> being defamed. It must be said to someone else.
>

** But it WAS, you fucking RETARD.
========================

DROP DEAD

On 10/03/2022 8:44 pm, Phil Allison wrote:
> Max the Fucking IDIOT wrote:
> ======================
>>>
>>>> How does Clive get to use private messages between McGowan and others in
>>>> the trial?
>>>
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages
>>>
>>
>>> ** Looks like strong evidence of defamation to most normal people.
>>>
>>> Or do you ( wrongly) imagine that defamation must be published in the media ?
>>>
>> It is not defamation to say something defamatory to only the person
>> being defamed. It must be said to someone else.
>>
>
> ** But it WAS, you fucking RETARD.
> ========================
>
> DROP DEAD

The texts were between Palmer and McGowan. McGowan did not send the text
to anyone else.

Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
> Phil Allison wrote
>> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote

>>>>> How does Clive get to use private messages between McGowan and
>>>>> others in the trial?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages
>>>>
>>>
>>>> ** Looks like strong evidence of defamation to most normal people.
>>>>
>>>> Or do you ( wrongly) imagine that defamation must be published in the
>>>> media ?
>>>>
>>> It is not defamation to say something defamatory to only the person
>>> being defamed. It must be said to someone else.

>> But it WAS

> The texts were between Palmer and McGowan.

And between McGowan and his AG and between McGowan and Stokes.

> McGowan did not send the text to anyone else.

Wrong, as always.

On 11/03/2022 3:59 am, Rod Speed wrote:
> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
>> Phil Allison wrote
>>> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
>
>>>>>> How does Clive get to use private messages between McGowan and
>>>>>> others in  the trial?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ** Looks like strong evidence of defamation to most normal people.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or do you ( wrongly) imagine that defamation must be published in
>>>>> the media ?
>>>>>
>>>> It is not defamation to say something defamatory to only the person
>>>> being defamed. It must be said to someone else.
>
>>>  But it  WAS
>
>> The texts were between Palmer and McGowan.
>
> And between McGowan and his AG and between McGowan and Stokes.
>

He just said he's a fat liar. That's not defamation.

>> McGowan did not send the text  to anyone else.
>
> Wrong, as always.

Max the trolling MORON wrote:
======================>>
> >> The texts were between Palmer and McGowan.
> >
> > And between McGowan and his AG and between McGowan and Stokes.
> >
> He just said he's a fat liar. That's not defamation.

** It is very defamatory.
And so is this: “He’s the worst Australian who’s not in jail.”

Go jump under train you LYING wog MORON.

..... Phil

Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
>>> Phil Allison wrote
>>>> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote

>>>>>>> How does Clive get to use private messagesbetween McGowan and
>>>>>>> others in the trial?

>>>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/09/wa-premier-described-clive-palmer-as-the-worst-australian-whos-not-in-jail-in-text-messages
>>>>>
>>>>>> ** Looks like strong evidence of defamation to most normal people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or do you ( wrongly) imagine that defamation must be published in
>>>>>> the media ?
>>>>>>
>>>>> It is not defamation to say something defamatory to only the person
>>>>> being defamed. It must be said to someone else.
>>
>>>> But it WAS
>>
>>> The texts were between Palmer and McGowan.

>> And between McGowan and his AG and between McGowan and Stokes.

> He just said he's a fat liar. That's not defamation.

It would be if it wasn't true. And he said
more than that to his AG and Stokes.

>>> McGowan did not send the text to anyone else.

>> Wrong, as always.

On 11/03/2022 10:34 am, Phil Allison wrote:
> Max the trolling MORON wrote:
> =======================
>>>
>>>> The texts were between Palmer and McGowan.
>>>
>>> And between McGowan and his AG and between McGowan and Stokes.
>>>
>> He just said he's a fat liar. That's not defamation.
>
> ** It is very defamatory.
> And so is this: “He’s the worst Australian who’s not in jail.”
>
> Go jump under train you LYING wog MORON.
>

If those two things are defamatory, what will be the likely damages
awarded by the court?

Max the trolling MORON wrote:
=======================
> >
> >>>> The texts were between Palmer and McGowan.
> >>>
> >>> And between McGowan and his AG and between McGowan and Stokes.
> >>>
> >> He just said he's a fat liar. That's not defamation.
> >
> > ** It is very defamatory.
> > And so is this: “He’s the worst Australian who’s not in jail.”
> >
> > Go jump under train you LYING wog MORON.
> >
> If those two things are defamatory, what will be the likely damages
> awarded by the court?
>

** Wait and fucking see, you Vile WOG TROLL

..... Phil

On 11/03/2022 11:57 am, Phil Allison wrote:
> Max the trolling MORON wrote:
> =======================
>>>
>>>>>> The texts were between Palmer and McGowan.
>>>>>
>>>>> And between McGowan and his AG and between McGowan and Stokes.
>>>>>
>>>> He just said he's a fat liar. That's not defamation.
>>>
>>> ** It is very defamatory.
>>> And so is this: “He’s the worst Australian who’s not in jail.”
>>>
>>> Go jump under train you LYING wog MORON.
>>>
>> If those two things are defamatory, what will be the likely damages
>> awarded by the court?
>>
>
> ** Wait and fucking see, you Vile WOG TROLL
>

I want to know now. What is an estimate for what it would be?

Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
> Phil Allison wrote
>> Max wrote

>>>>> The texts were between Palmer and McGowan.
>>>>
>>>> And between McGowan and his AG and between McGowan and Stokes.
>>>>
>>> He just said he's a fat liar. That's not defamation.
>> ** It is very defamatory.
>> And so is this: “He’s the worst Australian who’s not in jail.”
>> Go jump under train you LYING wog MORON.
>>
>
> If those two things are defamatory, what will be the likely damages
> awarded by the court?

Sweet fuck all, as I said repeatedly.

Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
> Phil Allison wrote
>> Max wrote

>>>>>>> The texts were between Palmer and McGowan.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And between McGowan and his AG and between McGowan and Stokes.
>>>>>>
>>>>> He just said he's a fat liar. That's not defamation.
>>>>
>>>> ** It is very defamatory.
>>>> And so is this: “He’s the worst Australian who’s not in jail.”
>>>>
>>>> Go jump under train you LYING wog MORON.
>>>>
>>> If those two things are defamatory, what will be the likely damages
>>> awarded by the court?
>>>
>> ** Wait and fucking see, you Vile WOG TROLL

> I want to know now.

You can't, the legal parasites haven't finished pumping pockets.

> What is an estimate for what it would be?

Like I said, sweet fuck all.

On 11/03/2022 7:34 am, Phil Allison wrote:
> Max the trolling MORON wrote:
> =======================
>>>
>>>> The texts were between Palmer and McGowan.
>>>
>>> And between McGowan and his AG and between McGowan and Stokes.
>>>
>> He just said he's a fat liar. That's not defamation.
>
> ** It is very defamatory.

Truth is a valid defense.

> And so is this: “He’s the worst Australian who’s not in jail.”
>

Truth again a valid defense.

Clocky the Cockhead Troll wrote:

============================>>>
> >> He just said he's a fat liar. That's not defamation.
> >
> > ** It is very defamatory.

> Truth is a valid defense.

** Yaaawwwwnnnnnnnnnn........

Clocky has no idea whatever.

> > And so is this: “He’s the worst Australian who’s not in jail.”
> >
> Truth again a valid defense.
>

** Shame some dumb as dogshit, fuckhead like Clocky has no clue whatever about what that *legal term * implies in defamation defence.

...... Phil