Forwarding this to Radstats and to Allstat, as it has expensive implications
for what we can say about quackery:
=============
I hope this will be of interest - Simon Singh is a good friend and a good
chap. This lawyer is making life hell - and inhibiting the critical comment
that commentators are alloed to make about quack practioners. (The word
'bogus' has been interpreted to mean "deliberately and knowingly deceitful")
If I were there, I would be _there_ (if you know what I mean!)
Hope you are all well
JOHN
The next event that will interest those following the case is a public
meeting on Monday 18 May at 6.30pm at Penderel’s Oak Pub (283 High Holborn,
WC1V 7HP). Speakers will include me, the amazing Nick Cohen, the fantastic
Dave Gorman and the heroic Evan Harris MP.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Simon <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 2009/5/17
Subject: Simon Singh Newsletter 33 - Libel Case Update
To: [log in to unmask]
Unfortunately this is not the usual newsletter, for the reasons outlined
beow. I anticipate one further newsletter dominated by my legal battle, and
then I will return to the more usual mix of maths, science, new projects,
oddities and puzzles.
Simon.
*Simon Singh v British Chiropractic Association & Justice Eady’s ruling on
meaning*
*An update from Simon Singh (Sunday 17 May, 2009)*
I apologise for the silence since last week’s bad news at the High Court,
but at last I have been able to take stock of the situation and write a
quick update.
It has been over a year since I wrote an article for the Guardian newspaper
(19 April 2008) about chiropractic, its effectiveness in relation to
childhood conditions and its risks. The British Chiropractic Association
then decided to sue me for libel and I have spent most of the last twelve
months building a defence.
Prior to the full trial it was agreed that it would be helpful for the
actual meaning of the article to be established in a preliminary hearing. On
Thursday 7 May 2009 the preliminary hearing took place at the Royal Courts
of Justice in front of Justice David Eady. It is not an understatement to
say that his ruling was, from my point of view, disastrous and misguided.
The core of my article, and the aspect that I thought was mainly under
scrutiny, suggested that chiropractors lacked evidence to support their
treatment of several childhood conditions. I therefore called these
treatments “bogus”.
The judge held that merely using the phrase “happily promotes bogus
treatments” meant that I was stating, as a matter of fact, that the BCA was
being consciously dishonest in promoting chiropractic for treating the
children’s ailments in question, in that they were promoting treatments they
knew were ineffective.
Although I maintain my position that such chiropractic treatment for
childhood conditions lacks any significant scientific basis and that
chiropractic in general carries risks, I do not and never have meant to
imply that chiropractors are deliberately and dishonestly offering such
treatments. My view is that, for example, they may not know the scientific
evidence, they may not understand it or they may have a biased
interpretation of the evidence – I don’t know. More generally, I share the
commonly held view that alternative therapists who offer treatments
unsupported by reasonable evidence are deluded rather than deliberately
dishonest. I think that Justice Eady has failed to interpret the meaning of
the article in the way that a reasonable reader would understand it.
The current ruling by Justice Eady means that I stand very, very little hope
of a successful defence at trial, so going to trial is not a realistic
option. My two reasonable options are to:
1. Settle now, which will cost in excess of £100,000 (the vast majority of
these costs would be to cover the BCA’s legal bills, as opposed to damages).
2. Submit an appeal in relation to the meaning of my article, hoping for a
more reasonable ruling on meaning and then fight the case on what the
article really meant.
I have until May 28 to lodge an application to appeal. I am seriously
thinking about this option and am discussing it with my lawyers. It would
increase my legal costs and eat up more time, but on the other hand I think
I deserve the chance to fight my case on a reasonable interpretation of my
article.
Moreover, this case demonstrates the chilling effect that the libel laws can
have journalism in general, and science journalism in particular. The events
of last week impact far beyond the author of one article on the subject of
chiropractic.
Last Thursday was a miserable day, but I like to think I am as resilient as
a Tigger. I am certainly in good spirits. In particular, family, friends,
readers and bloggers have all cheered me up.
Thanks also for your supportive messages. I will try to reply to emails, but
please forgive me if I don’t. The best option is to post to the Facebook
site (see below) – I do regularly read the wall and it frequently makes me
smile. I should also point out that the enormous support that I have
received from around the world has certainly made me more enthusiastic about
lodging an appeal (if this turns out to be a practical option). Scientists,
journalists, comedians, rationalists, skeptics, bloggers, politicians and
those who care about free speech have all expressed their outrage at last
week’s ruling.
The next event that will interest those following the case is a public
meeting on Monday 18 May at 6.30pm at Penderel’s Oak Pub (283 High Holborn,
WC1V 7HP). Speakers will include me, the amazing Nick Cohen, the fantastic
Dave Gorman and the heroic Evan Harris MP.
If you cannot make it to the meeting, then please help by letting others
know about the case, the ruling and the possibility of an appeal. If there
is an appeal, then it would be great to launch it upon a strong tide of
public support.
If you want to find out more about the case (or want to inform others) then
below are some useful links. This includes mainstream media coverage in New
Scientist, Nature and the Economist.
Thanks again to everyone who has been so supportive.
Simon (still smiling) Singh.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=33457048634
For Simon Singh and Free Speech - Against the BCA Libel Claim
This seems to be the best place for keeping up with the latest news and
developments. It contains links to various blogs and articles commenting on
the case. Joining the group is a great way to show your support.
http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/
Jack of Kent’s blog is well informed and written from an expert’s point of
view. Recent update postings include:
http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2009/05/bca-v-singh-astonishingly-illiberal.html
http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2009/05/what-should-simon-singh-do-next.html
Googling words such as SIMON SINGH, BCA, LIBEL will take you to lots of
blogs and articles about the libel case. Google news is particularly helpful
(search “SIMON SINGH”, and you can also then click on the blog option.
http://news.google.co.uk/news
Coverage
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227086.200-comment-dont-criticise-or-well-sue.html
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090513/full/news.2009.479.html
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13643973
------------------------------
" Upgrade to Internet Explorer 8 Optimised for MSN. " Download
Now<http://extras.uk.msn.com/internet-explorer-8/?ocid=T010MSN07A0716U>
--
Cheers JOHN BIBBY
|
