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
That, and he’s posting using his real name.
Mark
Bomber_the_Cat says:
December 18, 2011 at 7:39 am
not actionable? – perhaps you are reading the ‘edited’ version!!
Re: TB treading carefully, (comment by LT) – yes, I read it as advice, not a threat – but only LT can confirm that. For my money, (No pun intended) I’d be happy for TB and his team to simply get a public apology and retraction, and, if the likes of Laden and his legal advisors have any sense that’ll be issued promptly and be widespread through the blogosphere. Thereafter, a simple out of court offer of nominal ‘redress’ should be sensibly taken by TB……. otherwise, as I said earlier, all that happens is that the legal system gets paid a lot of money…
My limited experience (in expert witness type scenarios, and the negotiations therein) shows that people who argue over ‘points of principle’ are usually the worst at throwing good money after bad in these situations – and hence the only advice I would proffer to TB is to take time and consider. If I put the boot on the other foot – I’d be saying the opposite to Laden – namely, settle up now, or face a long potential legal and expensive battle……..both have choices, and decisions to make.
Robert of Ottawa says:
December 18, 2011 at 7:57 am
An interesting point – I’m not sure of the legal aspect (would have to ask my mum – county court clerk) but in the UK we often have journos reporting that people are ‘helping the police with their inquiry’ – which is clearly more ambiguous and far less incriminating!!
50 euros sent
Thanks for bringing that up. Laden’s claim was much more specific than Ball’s. Ball’s statement was pretty obviously snark – clearly not to be taken literally. The claim that Laden made, tweeted, and Mann retweeted was completely serious, and specific.
Robbo says:
Theft is taking property with the intent to permanently depriving the owner of it. …Publishing copies of emails could be a breach of confidence, a breach of copyright
Copyrighted material is Intellectual Property. If someone steals another ones IP, then the thief is depriving the author of the income from the royalties associated with the material. Even though the material may be an information file that the thief copied and the author has the original. If the thief publishes the material fist, then the author is damaged.
BUT….
That scenario only would hold true if the author used their own time and funds in collecting the Intellectual Property. In following the news on this subject, what seems to be occurring is that the authors of the information regard themselves as the owners of the IP. So by depriving them of the IP, they are being deprived of the AGW gravy train of future publicly funded research. When it comes out that their research may be suspect, those funds go away, along with reputations.
But since the information was acquired while these scientists were being funded, in both their salary and in the facilities used to gather this information, by public funds thru taxpayer dollars (or pounds, for my friends across the pond), thus the information is owned by the public and not the private individual, as is being alleged. For example, I work for a high-tech company, if I design a new product, the company owns the patent (IP) but I am on the paperwork as the originator of the design or idea. The company gets all of the $$ because I designed it on their dime, I get a pat on the back for a good job. And possibly another year of employment…..
What I foresee is that the researchers at these institutions may start to correspond thru private e-mail with their opinions and information, this can not be directly tracked.. But one day, someone will publish some information that was delivered thru private e-mail and they will have to account for how they acquired that info from the other researcher. If it is proven that they are using private e-mails for public funded work, I wonder if that would open up Pandora’s box and allow review of their private accounts?
Jut Wondering…..
I’ve sent monies from the home town of IPCC where some 25.000 UN-bureaucrats and thousands of additional NGO staff are beavering away to control the climate….i.e. control the world.
I suggest you call “Voodoo-Science”- Multi-Dr. R.K. Pachauri as an expert witness. He just uttered the following about Climate Realists in a California warming fest: “Launch them into space!”…on Sir Branson’s private space craft. More here:
http://www.grist.org/climate-skeptics/2011-12-16-new-approach-to-climate-deniers-launch-them-into-space
Sad, but true.
In the US, an attempt to avoid FOIA thusly is a crime by itself.
Mark
Mark T says on December 18, 2011 at 8:24 am
It is, at the very least, an admission that he realized he may have libelled Tallbloke He may still not view this as “wrong,” however.
I agree
Latimer Alder. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/17/tallbloke-to-take-to-torts/#comment-835208
Bloody HELL! Someone should tell Greg about the 1st law of holes!
DaveE.
Mark T says on December 18, 2011 at 9:01 am
In the US, an attempt to avoid FOIA thusly is a crime by itself.
Ooo.. I’d hate to b on the end of the investigation by the government if it were alleged I was swindling funds from that government. The government likes it’s (my) money.
I’m not a lawyer, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express. So for the edification of the legally ignorant, let’s recap a few things.
1. The right to free speech is guaranteed by the US constitution, but defamation is NOT protected. The SCOTUS has ruled that different standards exist for “public persons” and ordinary people. Roger is an ordinary person. Laden is probably an ordinary person. Mann’s status is unclear. He’s famous enough (due to his own doing) that one could argue that he’s a “public person”. In the US, truth is a complete defense against defamation.
2. In the UK, it’s a lot easier to win a defamation suit. In fact, it’s so easy that truth isn’t a complete defense. You can be found guilty of defamation even if what you say is completely true. Roger almost certainly would prevail if the case is filed in the UK.
3. I don’t know anything about Canada, but I imagine that it’s somewhere between the US and UK extremes.
4. The internet is the nexus that would allow jurisdiction in the UK, if Roger files suit there.
5. If Roger prevails in the UK, Laden and/or Mann would not be able to travel there without being forced to pay.
6. Getting a judgement in the US is facilitated by international agreements, but is complicated by recent statutes in several states and pending federal legislation that limits such judgments. The standard in the legislation is generally that the award will be allowed if the petitioner would have prevailed in the US. As far as I can tell, the only way to prove this is to file the case in the US. This means that Roger might as well file the case in the US. More here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_Evil#Subsequent_legislative_activity
Any real lawyers out there, please correct anything that I got wrong.
Of course, you always try to settle before going to court. Roger may want to be thinking about what he wants out of a settlement, in addition to money.
MikeH says:
December 18, 2011 at 8:46 am
What I foresee is that the researchers at these institutions may start to correspond thru private e-mail with their opinions and information, this can not be directly tracked.. But one day, someone will publish some information that was delivered thru private e-mail and they will have to account for how they acquired that info from the other researcher. If it is proven that they are using private e-mails for public funded work, I wonder if that would open up Pandora’s box and allow review of their private accounts?
If the citizen auditors will prevail, the essence of science will not be scientific progress
anymore, but the control instincts of the general public with motivations that are. let’s face
it political. I think similar systems have been tried in the Soviet Union and East Germany. with disastrous results for the science. Think twice.
Stephen Wilde: …ii) To protect the civil rights of Roger in particular but also others who migfht find that they have in the past or do in the future suffer damage or loss simply as a consequence of standing up for and applying that which was once at the heart of human progress namely the scientific method.
Thank you Stephen. I think this point is essential.
I don’t want to see a court case that just wins against Laden and even P.C.Norfolk Plod, in a situation where “The Team” close ranks and simply cut these offenders adrift. We need the leverage that a wisely-developed court case can give, to open the door precisely to public awareness that Scientific Method has been compromised dangerously, at untold expense, for personal gain or with malice aforethought, and that this has been deliberately hidden from the public. A usurping of power.
IMHO this needs collaboration with the best masters of strategy you can find. That and prayer.
As the late Rene Anselmo said:
Thruth and Technology will Triumph over bullshit and burocracy.
Donation in its way.
The wife and I sent money – but what is really important to ME – I used those Climategate 1.0 and 2.0 emails virtually everyday. Perhaps even MORE importantly Congressman Rohrabacher’s speech on climate issues WUWT story used some of those very emails right there in the US House in HIS speech. There in the House directly under the eyes and ears of the US Justice Department is like a huge slap upside the head to the very people targeting Tallbloke. It just doesn’t get any sweeter that that.
Moreover, the UK police and UK Justice are sharp enough to now know the world skeptical family is NOT idly sitting by and cowering under the gaze of the US Justice Department nor the UK justice – in fact the world skeptical family have come alive and shown both UK and US authorities WE are a very powerful force none understood nor bargained for the scrutiny that his now turned on THEM. The AGW community never understood the dedication and commitment of us skeptics or our ability to turn the table directly back on them – and for the very first time our community as a whole has struck back with so powerful a blow it is now the AGW community ducking for cover. Looking to erase their tracks. Looking to escape the spotlight.
Believe me – newspapers editor and TV executives are taking notice – NO MORE free ride. Mike Mann NOW understand HE is in for a real fight. Whether tallbloke wins this thing or not is irrelevant in the larger picture – what IS important is that he fight back. By fighting back tallbloke puts everyone on notice – and at the end of the day this IS a huge win for the skeptical community. WE have stood our ground and served notice – we’re a real force to be reckoned with from here on out!
I’m in this for the long haul – come next payday tallboke still needs more fund then I’m in this to the end helping out! This concern everyone one of us.
Robert in Ottowa (nice place by the way)
“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.
Not being a lawyer I will immediately proffer my opinion 🙂 I think this means that the police must have told a judge he is a suspect, or how else could they have obtained a warrant?”
It could be that, although they thought the person innocent, that said person had within their possession evidence important to a case they were investigating.
My guess is that they didn’t think TallBloke had committed any offence, but, rightly, wanted to get access to his computers without warning in case there was something on them that could be deleted if he was warned.
If you’re reading this Norfolk police, I’m in Suffolk and I understand that our two police “services” are about to be merged. Please don’t give us the toss pots who are carrying out this investigation, send them to Lincolnshire!
Dead birds and bats from around Danish windmill sold to a local pizza store = 50£ donated
..the cat will prolly p*** in my slippers but I can live with that
I’m glad to help. Donation sent.
Please, before this goes nuclear, can we give the Norfolk police the opportunity – WITHIN DAYS – to return Tallbloke’s property to him, thank him for his cooperation, and apologise for any inconvenience caused.
I am not at all sure that this is the place for the final battle of the climate wars, and that a good, honest and decent man may suffer from it.
(Note to any police reading this – the key is “within days”)
This is an interesting development. I’m in – and willing to increase the donation if necessary, as I’m sure a lot of others are too.
I just added to my original small donation. One forgets that the pound is no longer equal to around two dollars. Good luck, Tallbloke!
Mikael Pihlström says on December 18, 2011 at 9:29 am
If the citizen auditors will prevail, the essence of science will not be scientific progress anymore, but the control instincts of the general public with motivations that are. let’s face it political. I think similar systems have been tried in the Soviet Union and East Germany. with disastrous results for the science. Think twice.
The AGW faction has already made this political. The Climate Realists are trying to take the politics out of the science. Whenever a new weather satellite goes up or a atmospheric satellite is launched, NASA says ‘in the pursuit of understanding climate change’. Paid for by our taxpayer dollars. Dr. Hansen, getting paid to lecture on AGW, petitioning our government (which pays his salary) to create laws to control the public in the use of energy.
I don’t mind the climate science, I don’t want the government instructing scientists on what to or not to research. I just mind the politics that the AGW ‘Team’ has ‘Tag-Teamed’ into this fight..
“MikeH says:
December 18, 2011 at 8:46 am
What I foresee is that the researchers at these institutions may start to correspond thru private e-mail with their opinions and information, this can not be directly tracked.. But one day, someone will publish some information that was delivered thru private e-mail and they will have to account for how they acquired that info from the other researcher. If it is proven that they are using private e-mails for public funded work, I wonder if that would open up Pandora’s box and allow review of their private accounts?”
In Virginia, where I live, any public official or member of a public body subject to FOIA does not gain anything by attempting to use private accounts to hide public business. If the individuals are so careless, foolish or duplicitous as to use their private accounts in that manner, it does not accomplish any concealment, as the emails containing any discussion of public business are subject to FOIA, no matter what account they may be in. Private discussion in the same emails may be redacted, but the public business is subject no matter where one writes it. It has already occurred in our county, and emails from private accounts were entered in court, with the private portions redacted.
It appears that we have a number of people here dropping comments that indicate that they don’t even understand the topic of this thread. This is about Laden and Mann’s libel. Period. It’s not about the police, it’s not about the seizure of any equipment, it’s not about politics in science, it’s about a specific libel. K?