Dr. Mann’s lawsuit against National Review and Mark Steyn continues. National Review, while having walked back some of the early claims to square one, failed to get the suit dismissed. But Steyn is going on his own path and says he will fight in court for a verdict.
Anyone so inclined can help at: http://steynonline.com
[Note: I’ve removed the direct email address and most of the original comment, as it is creating an overwhelming response.
It seems that that best way to support Steyn’s effort is with a donation, see this:
Some readers have asked about that, Steyn says
As I’ve said, in previous battles I’ve never asked for money, and always responded simply by asking supporters to buy a book or a subscription to Maclean’s or whatever. But the scale of things is different down here: Michael Mann has Big Tobacco lawyer John Williams (before the hockey stick, his previous fictional client was Joe Camel) and at least three other named attorneys working on his case. So, for the moment, we’re asking those who “don’t need a coffee mug” to consider buying one of our new SteynOnline gift certificates either for a friend or for yourself, to be redeemed down the line in the event that we improve our mug designs. I’ve been heartened to see they’re being bought in places where I was barely aware I had readers, including the remoter Indonesian provinces, a couple of Central Asian stans, and dear old Vanuatu (for fellow old-school imperialists, that was pre-1980 the Anglo-French condominium of the New Hebrides). They never expire, so you can put it to one side and redeem it when my new book comes out later this year.
===========================================================
I’d suggest NOT leaving your questions in comments, since that may provide an unfair preparation advantage to the plaintiff. – Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
If Mann is a public figure, then he has no case. Numerous legal precedents in the US have established that public figures, having ample means at their disposal beyond the Law to counter public accusations of malfeasance, essentially cannot turn to the courts for redress of grievances.
And, Mann is indubitably a public figure.
Felix says:
February 4, 2014 at 11:21 am
“But could not Steyn’s crude Sandusky comparison, while not libelous in itself, be used as evidence of malice intent?”
No, because Steyn did not make that comparison. The other defendants did. Moreover, it was not directed at Mann but at Penn State. It was not in any way suggesting Mann was a child molester like Sandusky, but that Penn State’s internal “investigation” was of the same caliber as its indubitably subpar investigation of Sandusky.
Who is paying Mann’s defense?
JPS —
It seems to me that if Mann can convince the jury that he is not a fraud (that maybe he was wrong, not that he’d ever admit it, but not willfully so), then there’s a case to be made that Steyn made the statement with Reckless Disregard for its truth or falsity.
We recently had a long talk about this at Lucia’s. The trick is that Mann has to prove, not just that Steyn was careless, but that Steyn himself actually entertained “serious doubts” as to what he said. To really prove that is, and should be, a huge difficulty.
Of course, one a case survives all the motions to dismiss, for summary judgment, etc., you can tell the jury that…but then they can go back into their jury room and do whatever the heck they want. That is why I fear for Steyn’s well-being in this case.
Mike —
Malice is indeed a very difficult charge to get a conviction with. I really do hope Mann loses. But this move by Steyn doesn’t give me any confidence he has any idea how to defend himself. Remember, there are both sides in this case that need to present their cases in the strongest and most sound legal way possible. How many cases have we seen where one side lost, not because they should have lost, but because the case they presented to either prosecute or defend, was crap! I totally see that happening here.
In my opinion, Steyn, on principle, SHOULD prevail. But this is a court of law. He’d damned well better have his ducks in a row.
I couldn’t agree with you more! That is one reason I think the best thing for Steyn is to join the appeal — it’s based on free speech principles where Steyn’s case is strongest. And if he doesn’t appeal, or if heaven forbid the appeal fails, he’s going to need a good lawyer badly. I wrote him to say so. I hope he gets it, and listens.
Litigation can have terrible effects on a person’s psyche, whether he’s plaintiff or defendant, and unfortunately even a strong person’s judgment can skew badly when a case is driving him crazy. Whoever Steyn’s closest personal friends are, they should be talking him down off that ledge.
The fee arrangement between Mann and his attorneys and the names of anyone financing Mann, their reasons for providing finance and on what terms, may not fall under attorney-client privilege. Any such agreements could therefore be discoverable.
+++++++++++++++++++++
So what?
mfo says:
February 4, 2014 at 1:24 pm
“…the “hiding” phrase, while inartful, was referring to not displaying tree ring data over years when it was known to be misleading, Mann says.”
The fact is, there is no way to know when the tree ring data were misleading or not except in the specific time interval in which other measurements showed they were. Use of them before that time, therefore, was fundamentally circular logic – “the tree ring data before then are reliable because they show what we believe to be true, and we believe it to be true because the tree ring data indicate it.”
The Heartland Institute should be a good source. Particularly “ClimateGate Caught Green-Handed,” and its authors. Certainly, Singer, Soon, Spencer, Monckton, and Christy should have good material. Of course Lindzen should be able to help, as well as Steve Goreham, et al..
If Mann is a public figure, then he has no case.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
You people are sweet/idealistic….babes in the woods….simpletons, naïve.
You believe what’s right will prevail…haha….
Mann’s lawyers will put defendants through discovery to the tune of 5+ millions. If defendants fail to produce along the way they will get trial in which defendants are allowed no defense
It’s all about damages…..Unless there is a defense which will cost 10 million dollars.
Mann charges $10K as a public speaking engagements. It will be hard to argue he is not a public figure.
Richard D says:
February 4, 2014 at 1:45 pm
“You people are sweet/idealistic….babes in the woods….simpletons, naïve.”
Faux sophistication is for adolescents. Yes, the defendants have their work cut out for them. But, no, it is not insurmountable.
Mann charges $10K as a public speaking engagements. It will be hard to argue he is not a public figure.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
So what.
You going to pony up millions to get it to trial and test your theory> Send Steyn $20 or $500 dollars. Whatever, it costs 3000-5000/hr.
You morons that think this is about principals are morons unless you have real money to prove your point….
BTW, Mann doesn’t have to settle……He can simply drag this out punitively to cost steyn et al whatever it costs….10 million dollars…….discovery, trial date 5+ years, cost of trial, payout……
Faux sophistication is for adolescents. Yes, the defendants have their work cut out for them. But, no, it is not insurmountable.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Agree, if you can show me the money and budget to win. Otherwise you’re a babe in the woods…………..
=====================================================================
No.
Steyn doesn’t have “Big” anything backing him while Mann has “Big Climate”.
Steyn has asked the grass roots that form “Big Blogs” for advice and help.
If you were being audited by the IRS, wouldn’t you go to where you knew there were tax law experts for advice?
Ask yourself just why is Mann’s ego worth the cash to those funding all his lawsuits? Maybe shutting up the “deniers” is worth it? Maybe they’re after more than just defending someone’s reputation?
Faux sophistication is for adolescents
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sorry my vocabulary and turn of phrase is beyond yours. I highly recommend private schools and collage if you can afford it. I earnestly doubt you could hang with me and my peeps in grad school…..cheers.
Michael Mann’s own paper from 2005 is a possible.
In Knight et al 2005 he establishes that the AMO is a real and persistent oscillation.
All that is required is to show the AMO oscillation is also present in HadCRUT and is responsible for more than a third of the temperature rise last century, because it was at bottom in 1906 and topped out in 2005. The IPCC uses the period 1906-2005 as their ‘century’.
If Mike Mann rejects this, he rejects his own work. If he accepts this he falsifies his statements that CO2 caused all warming.
(Of course the Sun caused most of the rest of the temperature rise last century, CO2 may have been responsible for about a sixth of it.)
“I highly recommend private schools and collage if you can afford it.”
LOL
Richard D says:
February 4, 2014 at 2:13 pm
OK, Junior. Sorry I made you cry. Run along now and play with your, um, peeps.
Bart says: February 4, 2014 at 2:26 pm
Come and play, Bart, if you think you can hang with a rigorous graduate education and board certification….I think you are more the virtual type……
Michael Mann’s own paper from 2005 is a possible.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Insurance could care less and settles…..
Hey……Richard…….did your rigorous…….graduate……………education…….include classes on how to punctuate……..ellipses………
Richard D says:
February 4, 2014 at 2:13 pm
Faux sophistication is for adolescents
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sorry my vocabulary and turn of phrase is beyond yours. I highly recommend private schools and collage if you can afford it. I earnestly doubt you could hang with me and my peeps in grad school…..cheers
At least this COLLEGE dropout can spell it. But, then again, perhaps “collage” is a better description of your and your “peeps”?
@ur momisugly reg nelson. Whatever LOL
James the Elder says: February 4, 2014 at 3:02 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I’m not surprised when spelling bee champions drop out of college
Meanwhile, Steyn faces millions to defend and possible damages and you idiots think it’s what right or wrong LOL….
I would consider Mann’s emails at UVa as necessary for discovery.
I have read elsewhere that Mr. Steyn is representing himself. This seems to me to be an extraordinarily foolish decision (if true). Perhaps it is due to financial constraints. In any case, I would like to see Mr. Steyn clarify the situation, for if he is representing himself I rather doubt he will be successful.