Bloggers, Beware of Comments
According to Out-law, the English High Court has ruled that a man who did not delete an allegedly-defamatory post from his blog could not sue the poster in defamation.
Christopher Carrie, the would-be litigant, established the blog in 2007 to promote his self-published book, in which he alleges that he was sexually abused by the late Father John Tolkien, who died in 2003. Tolkien was the son of an author with whom you may be familiar. According to Carrie, Tolkien’s grandson Royd Tolkien posted a comment on his site, accusing Carrie of lying about the abuse to extract money from the Catholic church.
The court found that by leaving the inflammatory remarks online, Carrie had consented to their publication, which contradicted his assertion that the post caused him “substantial upset and distress”. The ruling is here.
Summary judgment: Leaving the post online for all to see does little to alleviate the suspicion that Carrie was trying to cash in by besmirching a famous surname.
Comments
13 Responses to “Bloggers, Beware of Comments”
Disclaimer
Law Is Cool is an open forum for ideas, intended to stimulate discussion. The views expressed in posts and comments are those of the individual contributor and may not be reflective of the views of other authors or readers.
The contents of this site are intended for educational purposes only and must not be construed as legal advice.
We encourage everyone requiring legal advice to consult with a licensed lawyer.
Pages
-
Latest Posts
- Occupy Ties to former Bay Street Lawyer
- Keep it in Perspective
- Discrimination at the University of Ottawa?
- Toronto Mayor Rob Ford Lacked Legal Authority to Cancel Transit City
- Should Representative Plaintiffs Receive More?
- Breach of They Neighbour’s Wife
- Advocates Don’t Dance Alone
- These Days the Slaves Fight Back
- How law students can boost their job prospects with a good online profile
Latest Comments
- Shafia honour trial, All the (older) single ladies, Bullying « Anything Anything Anything on About Law is Cool
- Shafia honour trial, All the (older) single ladies, Bullying « Anything Anything Anything on About Law is Cool
- Anne on Profile of a Stalker
- Bob Bennett on Can a police officer still give you a ticket if they’re not wearing their hat?
- KC on These Days the Slaves Fight Back
- KC on Discrimination at the University of Ottawa?
- Mary Puto on Employee Privacy in Canada
- Debbie Adams on Advice for Incoming Mature Law Students
- Annie Duguay on Can a police officer still give you a ticket if they’re not wearing their hat?
- Veronica on Why You Should Never Talk to the Police
Post Categories
- Aboriginal Law
- Administrative
- Administrative Law
- ADR/Mediation
- Bankrupcy & Insolvency
- Blogroll
- Civil Procedure
- Civil Rights
- Class Action
- Constitutional Law
- Construction Law
- Contracts
- Corporate Law
- Criminal Law
- Diversity in Law
- Entertainment Law
- Environmental Law
- Ethics
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Health Law
- Humour
- Immigration Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Labour & Employment Law
- Law Career
- Law Foundations
- Law School
- Law School Tips
- Legal Reform
- Legal Research
- Marketing/PR in Law
- Media Law
- Podcasts
- Politics
- Pop Culture
- Privacy
- Privacy Law
- Pro Bono
- Property
- Public Interest
- Regulatory Law
- Reviews
- Securities Law
- Tax Law
- Technology
- Torts
- Trusts/Estates
- Uncategorized
Aboriginal Law
Administrative Law
Class Action Suits
Constitutional Law & Civil Rights
Corporate Law
Criminal Law
Environmental Law
Family Law
Firms
- Back of Envelope blog
- BC Business Law Blog
- BC LawLINE
- bob tarantino
- Business Law Blog
- Canada Immigration
- Canada Immigration Blog
- Canadian Immigration Blawg
- Canadian Privacy Law Blog
- Canadian Securities Law Online
- Canadian Trademark Blog
- Cavanaagh Williams
- Daniel A. Lublin
- Daniel Lublin
- EXCESS COPYRIGHT
- GenereuxLaw
- Hoyes Michalos and Associates
- Injury Law Blog.com
- Law of the Land
- Municipal, Planning & Environmental Law Group Blog
- Now, Why Didn’t I Think of That?
- Osler Audio Reports
- Real Lawyers Have Blogs
- Renewable Energy & Sustainable Development Group Blog
- Robinson Sheppard Shapiro
- Rule of Law
- Schenk & Associates
- Strictly Legal
- Thoughts from a Management Lawyer
- Toronto Estate Law Blog
- Venture Law Lines
Fun & Entertainment
Health Law
Immigration Law
Intellectual Property
International Law
Labour & Employment Law
Labour Law
Law Marketing/PR
Law News
Law School
- Ablawg.ca
- Chaire en droit de la sécurité et des affaires électroniques
- Constantinos Ragas
- Emadi St. Pierre
- Law Enforcement Accountability Project (LEAP)
- Law, Eh? Canadian Law School
- lawstudents.ca
- Legal and Literary Society
- Legal Intellects
- Lisa Hutch – The Trials
- Michael Geist’s Blog
- Michelle’s World
- Motion to Recess
- Non Traditional Law Student
- Outlines
- Privity: Just between You and Me
- The Court
- Trials and Tribulations
- TwistLaw.com
- UBC Law Library Blog
- University of Toronto Law School Faculty Blog
Legal Research
- Ballad in Plain E
- British Columbia Courthouse Library Society
- Connie Crosby
- CultureLibre.ca (French)
- Law21
- Library Boy
- LibTech Life
- Right and Remedies
- Shaunna Mireau on Canadian Legal Research
- Slaw
- Thoughtful Legal Management
- TwistLaw.com
- UBC Law Library Blog
- Vancouver Law Librarian Blog
- Wines and Information Management (WIM) (French)
Personal Injury Law
Podcasts
Politics
Property & Estate Law
Securities Law
Student Blogs
Archives
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007

RSS Feed







![CBA_MasterBrand_Logo[1]](http://lawiscool.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/CBA_MasterBrand_Logo1.jpg)



















Sir David Eady has set a dangerous precedent with this ruling.
At the time of the posting I had very little understanding of how to edit my blog. This is evidenced by the 15 days it took me to work out how to delete my personal address. I then took the view it was too late to do anything more than argue the case in the forum. To that end I left Royd Tolkien’s scurrilous comments in place. The name Tolkien was very much in the news at the time virtue of the debacle between New Line Cinema and the Tolkien Estate. This resulted in Royd’s rant being copied and pasted throughout the Internet in a matter of hours. For me to remove it from one site was the equivalent of urinating on a volcano.
The thing that irks me most about Sir David Eady’s conclusion is; he knows about as much as I did at the time of the posting about blogging and editing i.e. next to nothing.
Combine his lack of knowledge with my position, unrepresented, against the Tolkien millions and you get the judgement he made. For the judge to use precedent set in matters concerning Arab billionaires is ridiculous. I am a single parent of two children struggling to make ends meet.
I am prepared to answer any sensible question posed on this forum.
Yours
Christopher Carrie
I think the summary judgment in the article above is unfair. I agree with Carrie that it can take awhile to figure out how to delete comments from a blog. I had that trouble with two of my blogs. Moreover, on one of my blogs I have to manually check for recent comments – I don’t get email notices. Additionally, there is the question of how to take action on a complaint if one has personally destroyed the evidence, which may also have been in Carrie’s mind.
Having said all that, however, I do think there was a more effective way to deal with a comment like that: and that would have been to have left it on and challenged the commentator to provide proof of his allegation – together with a reminder to Tolkien that his comment is defamatory and the onus is therefore on him to either back it up with proof or to withdraw the comment like a gentleman. I do think this would have had the effect of spinning back on Tolkien, deservedly so, the detrimental effects of his comment. Moreover, I doubt anyone would have taken his comment seriously in lieu of proof – most of the cyberworld has had some experience of online trolls by now.
P.S. I should add that my advice above about how to best address defamatory comments only applies, of course, if the comments are made about the blog owner. I quickly delete comments posted on my sites that defame anyone else – and I leave a note addressing the commentator by name if I know it and explaining why the comment was deleted (ie that it was defamatory/obscene/abusive asf). I have found this to be a very effective method for discouraging the making of further inappropriate comments. It also helps to teach people what is appropriate and what isn’t. Not everybody online automatically knows the difference.
I’m a fan of Tolkien and a lot of us have know about this man who has hassles Tolkiens for many years. It is good to see he has not won and it is good to see the exposition of his lies and motivations. I believe Justice Eady made the correct decision and I hope this man will now stop his hassles of the Tolkiens and lovers of Tolkien books.
Carsten – Dream on…
Marnie – Check these
Quote; “Tolkien has been arrested…” Detective Inspector Steve Craddock, West-Midlands Police.
Quote; “The case passed what is termed the evidential test; in that it was felt there was sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction.” Julie Seddon, Crown Prosecution Service.
I can’t find a news source for those two quotes on the internet. Perhaps you could direct me to the news website they are quoted from so I can research this most interesting case. I would like to interview both these people.
The quote from DI Steve Craddock was a personal quote.
The quote from the CPS can be verified at the following link:
http://icbirmingham.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100localnews/content_objectid=13198462_method=full_siteid=50002_headline=–Damages–paid-in-Tolkien-case-name_page.html
OK, so no online source for the first quote.
On the second quote, despite searching, I cannot find any reference to a quote from the CPS or a Julie Seddon. I presume you have posted an incorrect link. Please could you post a link so I can verify this source and speak to Ms Seddon. Thanks.
The quote in this newspaper report is clear enough-don’t you think?
Considering this news dates back to 2003 it’s reasonable to accept the many, many reports at that time have expired.
Try archiving the information! http://www.archive.org/web/web.php
Or if you are accredited contact the ‘Crown Prosecution Services’ and ask.
You could contact the ‘Sunday Mercury’ and ask them to verify the quote used in the article.
“A police investigation was launched into the sex abuse allegations and the Crown Prosecution Service decided that ***there was enough evidence to put Fr Tolkien before the courts***.
But by that time he was too ill to be charged.”
I still can’t find the quote, but thanks for the Sunday Mercury suggestion, I’ll call them.
Just to clarify – “But by that time he was too ill to be charged.” – So he was never actually charged?
Correct he was not charged and forwarded for trial on the basis he was deemed to be in a state of senile dementia.
I should add I took a private libel action in the High Courts against Fr Tolkien. The process of getting to court took fourteen months. Fr Tolkien died on the very morning his case was listed, stranger than fiction.
To be clear then – there were no judgements made against Fr Tolkien? If you have anything concrete, I’d be very interested in writing an article, but I’m sure you appreciate I can only publish if there are hard facts to deal with.
Tolkien fans are flocking to my new website
http://www.wix.com/CCarrie/TOLKIEN-TEMPLATE
Sample of my page on Royd:
In mid February 2007 Royd Baker took exception to me promoting my book Kloneit by posting the following on a movie forum.
“10 Facts about Christopher Carrie
1 Carrie has a criminal record which would prevent him working with children or vulnerable adults.
2 Carrie is a fraudster who has tried for many years, unsuccessfully, to defraud and extract money from the Catholic Church, the Tolkien family and other celebrities.
3 Carrie is well known to local and national police. He has been contacted by them on numerous occasions with regard to his threatening behavior.
4 Carrie has admitted that he lied about his sexual abuse in order to extract money from the church. (The Sun, 14th September 2004). Carrie said: It was mischievous of me but when theres money on offer
5 Carrie did not live within 100 miles of John Tolkien when at the time of the alleged abuse.
6 Carrie has never won a legal case against another party.
7 Carrie has never sued anyone who has challenged his self published lies.
8 Carrie part owns Luna Internet. This is the only reason his website still exists.
9 Carrie is trying to sell the film rights to his fictitious life story on ebay for £1 million. No one has bid for it.
10 Carrie is currently a struggling IT worker who lives at 2 Conway Close, Solihull, West Midlands, B90 4RR you can contact him there.
Royd Tolkien”
The only factual part of his posting is my address.
So why did this snivelling piece of shit do this.
I made it my business to learn more about Royd. It didn’t take long to find he’s a nothing who plays on the Tolkien name in order to fulfill his egotistical aims.
In comlete contovention of the principle Tolkien mandate he allowed Peter Jackson to use him to give credence to the film they were so much against. Then he posed naked for a gay magazine see photo one.