Tallbloke to take to torts

I’ve received this email from Roger Tattersall’s attorney (known as a solicitor in England) with the request that I post it. I’m happy to do so. Please see in the letter where the legal fund is being setup. – Anthony

To:

All those who feel offended and/or threatened by the actions taken against innocent climate enthusiast Roger Tattersall aka ‘Tallbloke’ as a result of the unsought anonymous drop of data from the person or persons known as ‘FOIA’.

That data is clearly in the public interest by virtue of having relevance to the wisdom of certain global policy decisions relating to energy use, energy supply and possibly global rationing of energy sources and the direct or indirect taxation of every individual on the planet for the foreseeable future.

Roger has been publicly libelled and abused across the world to the detriment of his reputation and has suffered distress, inconvenience and damage to property. The worst such offender appears to have been a contributor at ‘Scienceblogs’.

His privacy has been invaded and he and his family have been intimidated.

It is possible that treatment of that nature could be meted out to any persons expressing sceptical views about the so called climate consensus.

A clear signal needs to be sent out that such treatment is an abuse of process and a negation of free speech and democratic freedoms.

It is proposed to investigate all options open to Roger for the obtaining of suitable redress within the law. In the event that legal actions are considered appropriate it will be necessary to appoint suitably experienced Counsel to represent his interests and in this matter Roger’s interests coincide with those of all of who find themselves unable to feebly acquiesce in the pressure that is being applied to prevent them from exercising their hard won freedoms.

To that end, an appeal fund is being launched in order to finance the necessary steps. Contributions can be made via Roger’s Paypal account as displayed on his site (http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/) and all funds received for that purpose are to be transferred to the Client Account of his solicitors Wilde & Company.

Any funds not eventually used for necessary legal expenses will be donated to a selection of climate sceptic organisations. Accounting procedures will be put in place in compliance with the requirements of the UK regulatory system governing the proper use of Client monies held by UK solicitors.

Stephen P R Wilde. LLB (Hons.), Solicitor.

Wilde & Co. Cheshire England

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Kev-in-UK

My £50 donation sent immediately. Hope it helps Rog…..

Stephen: Thanks for showing interest in Roger’s plight.
Enjoy your holidays.

A tenner to the fund

jono

Could we use the words “climate Realist” instead of “Climate sceptic” with this action (possible action) we have a chance to imprint a new `title` on the MSM, and one that more accurately reflects our goals and aspirations rather than `climate sceptic` which is of course a misnomer (are we not actually “too fast a warming or warming on its own sceptics”)
left a tip with tallbloke to help
regards

dalyplanet

A most excellent solicitor considering solicitor Wilde’s excellent understanding of the issues at hand.

posted to as many of my connections as poss. Hope it helps.

My pittance donated

Robert of Ottawa

I just donated 50 pounds too. I think I was the first to suggest a legal action funded via internet. But, what courses of legal action are possible? If you can post more info on that, it would be helpful.

Brad Hills

Here’s my 50 GBP.

Green Sand

Tallbloke, may your shadow never grow shorter!
Donation made at your site! (Declaration – I grow my own veg but have no association with biofuels or big oil!)

Dr K.A. Rodgers

Done.

guam

Will X post this on PH if not already done Tallbloke
Will whizz £100 your way monday from the office.
Give them hell

GregO

Tallbloke,
Here’s something for the fund. Keep up the good fight for truth and I’m sorry to hear how you were harassed and libeled.

petermue

I’ll keep my fingers crossed, Roger! Good luck!
Just donated…

Steve from Rockwood

Sent £50 yesterday. Resisting with all my might making a few lawyer jokes. What’s the difference between a lawyer and a noisy turkey?

Andy

Regarding Greg Laden’s nasty article, I’ve noticed that he’s stopped taking comments now – seems he can’t take the heat!
I will be donating on Monday – it’ll be a small amount, but I’m being squeezed by my rising energy bills due to the UK govt’s insistence that everyone in the UK should subsidise wretched ‘renewables’ 🙁

ChE

What? Big Oil, Inc. isn’t going to pay all expenses?
/sarc

Honest ABE

Tim Lambert?

LazyTeenager

Roger has been publicly libelled and abused across the world to the detriment of his reputation and has suffered distress, inconvenience and damage to property. The worst such offender appears to have been a contributor at ‘Scienceblogs’.
—————
There seems to be two issues that are being mixed up here.
1. Libel
2. Police investigation
This particular paragraph gives the impression that the libel gave rise to -suffered distress, inconvenience and damage to property-.
So what’s this damage to property arising from the libel? Or is it being accidentally or deliberately misleading?

Hugh Whalen

Another 50 GBP from me.

Jono, I agree with your excellent idea that we should use the words “climate Realist” instead of “Climate sceptic”. By the same token, I’m going to stop using the phrase ‘global elite’ because every time we use it, we reinforce the idea of their superiority. Instead, from now on, it’s ‘the global delete’.

Jimbo

All this over a not unusual small rise in temperature “caused” by man’s trace rise of the trace gas co2?
Amazing!!!!
(lucrative climate funding, taxation powers, Monbiot’s crap books, exotic jaunts, wind farm investments (Lord Ox.), fame, blah, blah………..) Follow the money >>>>>>>>>>

Chuck Kraisinger

Tallbloke: I am grateful to you, Anthony, Steve Mc., Ross, willis, Bob T., Roger P., the Bish and defenders of freedom everywhere (that includes Judge Napolitano). My $50 (US) is on its way.

Stephen Wilde

“But, what courses of legal action are possible? If you can post more info on that, it would be helpful.”
i) Potential libel claims against Laden and Mann and any others who might be found to have stated, suggested or implied that there was criminality on the part of Tallbloke.
ii) Potential malfeasance by the persons responsible for the obtaining of the Warrant in the form deemed appropriate (but actually wholly inappropriate) and for the heavy handed treatment of Tallbloke who would always have been prepared to assist voluntarily.
iii) Various damages claims under UK law for distress, inconvenience, invasion of privacy and damage to property.
iv) Possible injunctive relief preventing examination, copying, cloning or any unauthorised use of Tallbloke’s private data.
v) Requests for immediate return of Tallbloke’s property and rectification of damage done during the process.
vi) Investigations into the sequence of events that led to this farrago and the identities of the person or persons responsible.
Other possibilities may come to mind in due course.

crosspatch

If that paypal account collects too much in donations, it will be frozen. Just be mindful of that. It has happened to many good causes before.
[Reply: Then Tallbloke had better empty it every day. ~dbs]
[Reply] Transfer arrangements are already being sorted out. Cheers -TB mod.

Paul Vaughan

Stephen P R Wilde. LLB (Hons.), Solicitor. wrote:
“It is possible that treatment of that nature could be meted out to any persons expressing sceptical views about the so called climate consensus.
A clear signal needs to be sent out that such treatment is an abuse of process and a negation of free speech and democratic freedoms.”

These are heavy matters.

ChE

Let’s not forget that Michael Mann gaily repeated (retweeted) the libel. That also counts. How many thousands of Twitter followers does he have?

LazyTeenager

A clear signal needs to be sent out that such treatment is an abuse of process and a negation of free speech and democratic freedoms.
————-
I think this is the key.
Tallbloke wants to make a statement and be a hero.
The problem I see is that Tallbloke simultaneously wants a libel action against someone else exercising their freedom of speech while retaining unlimited freedom of speech for himself. If it was the case that libeling others was Tallbloke’s habit, then Tallbloke would have no moral standing, though it is quite likely not admissible in a court case.
Here is a bit of advice for Tallbloke. Don’t do this. You do not understand the consequences that follow from this.

pauline

Just read the Greg Laden post with horror, some of the comments on both sides of the camp are a little OTT.Enjoyed the term ‘denialati’, perhaps we could coin a few others. However Tallboke, you do have my full support and sympathy for your plight.

Guessing that he would need help, I donated before this was posted. But really, someone should step up and represent him pro bono.

Frederick Davies

£50 on the way.
FD

Danny V

Donation sent from a Canuck

Freedoms are not protected when people do nothing. Freedoms, especially basic rights, must be fought for on a daily basis.
Donation forthcoming to fund the fight.

val majkus

I’ll be donating tomorrow and I’ve spread the word on Jo Nova’s site and Pointman’s

Donation done. Give them hell.
Pointman

My share has been sent from Norway!
This is an important issue.

Sam Hall

£50 sent.

Noelene

I would like to see him take on the police,not the person writing drivel,if Tallbloke loses his job it will be because of the police taking his computer,thereby implying he has committed a crime.If Tallbloke gave the police permission to take his computer,then I imagine his hands are tied.It always amazes me when I watch reality police shows how the police can bluff people.They ask can we search your car or house,and the people say ok,knowing that they have something to hide.I’m not complaining,anything that helps the police,but doesn’t anybody know to ask can you do that without my permission?
I guess it springs from the misguided belief that police can do anything.
Anyway, I will donate,but I suspect it will come to nothing.Wonder if he signed a document giving them permission?
[Reply] No, I signed only to verify Q&A’s. – TB mod.

Walter

To clarify something, especially for “LazyTeenager”:
A libel occurs when anybody says or publishes something which can harm the character or good name of another.
Freedom of speech does not give you the freedom to libel. (In the USA things are a little different – some public figures can’t sue for libel because the legal tests are different.)
Under UK and Australian law, it seems the libel is considered to happen where the publication is VIEWED, not where written, nor where stored. The libel does not even have to be public, or have a wide audience. In many countries there is a complete misunderstanding, where it is commonly thought that there is freedom of speech – meaning you can say what you like. Thats actually not the case, even in the US.
What this means is that Mr Laden, in particular, is in the poo. By writing what he did and publishing it for a world audience, he allowed it to be viewed in the UK, and so a legal action in the UK is possible.
This would be a civil matter, and most likely decided not by a jury but most likely by a judge alone. (UK Lawyers may wish to correct me on this matter).
My speculation on a possible series of events: If Mr Laden is found to have libelled, damages (usually monetary) would be awarded by the court. Not being in the UK, getting Mr Laden to pay up may prove difficult (a UK citizen would have further legal consequences for non-payment). Essentially, should Mr Laden not pay up, the matter then becomes criminal – for example failure to follow a direction of the court is a contempt of court, not a place you want to go. A consequence of that is that should Mr Laden ever travel to the UK he could be arrested on entry to the country.
(Legal types may wish to clarify the above as well, but thats it as I see it).
It will be fun times.

He said he would sue yesterday. Outstanding. Glad to see a firm responded to his request. Stock up on the popcorn.

DonB in VA

Although this is from Pennsylvania I am sure that the concept is embedded in the common law:
§ 3922. Theft by deception.
(a) Offense defined.–A person is guilty of theft if he
intentionally obtains or withholds property of another by
deception. A person deceives if he intentionally:
(1) creates or reinforces a false impression, including
false impressions as to law, value, intention or other state
of mind; but deception as to a person’s intention to perform
a promise shall not be inferred from the fact alone that he
did not subsequently perform the promise;
(2) prevents another from acquiring information which
would affect his judgment of a transaction; or
(3) fails to correct a false impression which the
deceiver previously created or reinforced, or which the
deceiver knows to be influencing another to whom he stands in
a fiduciary or confidential relationship.
(b) Exception.–The term “deceive” does not, however,
include falsity as to matters having no pecuniary significance,
or puffing by statements unlikely to deceive ordinary persons in
the group addressed.
My question is whether or not any tax paying citizen could bring suit asserting that monies have been taken by deception to fund research by those who know that they are using deception in order to gain such funds?

albertalad

May I ask if this is a legitimate address FOR Roger Tattersall (aka tallbloke) and that the funds will indeed go to his defense? Just looking for assurance before sending funds.

Michael Larkin

Tallbloke,
Being a sceptic myself, I support you. However, I’m wondering whether seeking legal redress against Laden is an altogether wise thing to do – libel suits may have unintended consequences. On the other hand, seeking redress against the police is something I am more in favour of. But whatever happens, I wish you well.

Danny V

albertalad –
My donation receipt as follows. I edited his email address to include the “.
“This email confirms that you have donated £20.00 GBP to Roger Tattersall (rog”@”tallbloke.net) using PayPal.”

spangled drongo

Stephen Wilde, thanks for that and good luck to you both. 50 quid on the way.

DirkH

LazyTeenager says:
December 17, 2011 at 4:20 pm
“Here is a bit of advice for Tallbloke. Don’t do this. You do not understand the consequences that follow from this.”
Go on, go on, while you’re at it, what ARE the consequences, LegalExpertTeenager?

I’m in for L50…

Barbara Skolaut

Donation sent. Good luck, Tallbloke.

RockyRoad

pauline says:
December 17, 2011 at 4:33 pm

Just read the Greg Laden post with horror, some of the comments on both sides of the camp are a little OTT.Enjoyed the term ‘denialati’, perhaps we could coin a few others. However Tallboke, you do have my full support and sympathy for your plight.

I’ve been supporting the
case of replacing the “sceptic/skeptic” term with “realist” for some time. “Realist” has a positive, moral-high-ground connotation, whereas “sceptic/skeptic” does not.
As such, I’m a proud member of the “realati” when it comes to climate and refute all this catastrophic heavy-handed mumbo-jumbo coming from people that don’t have anybody’s interest at heart except their own (although they’re so short-sighted it’s comical in a sad, sad way).

Steve McIntyre

£750 from Climate Audit. .