IIRC, one of the problems Simon Singh faced in defending against the
spurious libel attack by chiropracters was that the judge in the case
interpreted his use of the word "bogus" out of context and in such a way that
he would be left with an impossible task of proving that the plaintiff had
knowingly and fraudulently promoted chiropractic treatments. Whereas it was
clear in context that he had only claimed that the treatments they promoted
for certain conditions were bogus in the sense of being unsupported by any
evidence.
He appealed this bogus interpretation and eventually
prevailed.
Meanwhile the
British Chiropractic Association (or whatever)
Striesanded themselves into a
bit of a predicament, so it all turned out OK
:)
--- The emperor, undaunted by overwhelming evidence that he had no
clothes, redoubled his siege of Antarctica to extort tribute from the penguins. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|