Twitter reveals Mr. Monkey?

[Halb]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/8544...

Saw this on the Marr show today.
"For the first time, the American social networking site has bowed to a court action brought by a British group complaining that they were libelled in messages.

The individuals who brought the legal action were councillors and officials at a local authority, South Tyneside.

They launched the case in an attempt to unmask an anonymous whistle-blower who calls himself Mr Monkey.

The action is believed to have cost council tax payers hundreds of thousands of pounds...
Since 2008 Mr Monkey has levelled allegations against councillors ranging from ballot-rigging, drug-taking and fiddling expenses to a claim that one successfully ordered a public bus to turn around and pick him up from a pub late at night."

...intriguing...

[anonymous-user]

I don't find this very surprising really. Twitter may be populated by people who think they are anonymous anti establishment freedom fighters, but Twitter itself is a corporation that is unlikely to want to acquire a rep for condoning lawbreaking.

The whistler blowers will just move somewhere else, butr I doubt they are the back bone of Twitter's users.

[paddyhasneeds]

But the difference here is surely that the case was tried in an American court under American laws?

That's a bit different to faxing over a court order from South Tyneside Magistrates Court.

[RemainAllHoof]

They could keep using Twitter but with different usernames, of course. Just register for free email at hotmail, yahoo etc.

[AndrewW-G]

At least the fact that they spent so much on something like this, brings into focus that South Tyneside council have a significant amount of money that can be slashed from their budget, without effecting front line services.

[petemurphy]

ffs how much is this costing and how can they get away with it

[Jasandjules]

petemurphy said:

ffs how much is this costing and how can they get away with it

Too much.

It is fairly well known that Govt departments quite often will fight court cases which others might not - the reason - it ain't their money they are spending in fees.

[Mojooo]

Jasandjules said:

petemurphy said:

ffs how much is this costing and how can they get away with it

Too much.

It is fairly well known that Govt departments quite often will fight court cases which others might not - the reason - it ain't their money they are spending in fees.

Sadly my experience in a prosecuting part of a Council was that they wouldnt NOT prosecute if it was complex or it would lead to bed publicity - therefore they prosecuted the easy blatant cases but didnt bother with the ones that were very complex or the offender was a PITA.

On this subject I can kind of see why they have taken the action.

[davepoth]

That said, if it is actually libel then I wouldn't want to stop.

[Countdown]

But their actions have resulted in far more publicity than Mr Monkey would otherwise have achieved, so surely it's been self-defeating.

Anybody here read "Rotten Boroughs" in Private Eye? I'm surprised that doesn't receive more attention.

[petemurphy]

davepoth said:

That said, if it is actually libel then I wouldn't want to stop.

yeah its nice to waste other peoples money. if its such cut and dry he can fund it himself

[AndrewW-G]

Countdown said:

Anybody here read "Rotten Boroughs" in Private Eye? I'm surprised that doesn't receive more attention.

It receives plenty of attention, it's only the eye's attention to detail and policy of defending their publication very very publicly, that prevents them from getting into trouble.

I’m sure if you went back through the magazines history, you’d find that the vast majority of legal action taken against them, has been unsuccessful . . . . .and on occasion even some of the successful ones have been overturned or the plaintiff found to have lied.

[Mojooo]

Twitter have now released some data - so the author may well be identified and taken to court soon for libel - I wonder if it is indeed that councillor.

[Mojocvh]

AndrewW-G said:

Countdown said:

Anybody here read "Rotten Boroughs" in Private Eye? I'm surprised that doesn't receive more attention.

It receives plenty of attention, it's only the eye's attention to detail and policy of defending their publication very very publicly, that prevents them from getting into trouble.

I’m sure if you went back through the magazines history, you’d find that the vast majority of legal action taken against them, has been unsuccessful . . . . .and on occasion even some of the successful ones have been overturned or the plaintiff found to have lied.

I do LIKE PE, but it does raise the blood pressure at times! [what it throws up]

[Puggit]

Updates and further revelations in Soovy on Sunday: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394135/Ca...

Looks like South Tyneside are going to town on lawyer's fees - apparently £250k so far, according to the Mail!

[Deva Link]

Puggit said:

Updates and further revelations in Soovy on Sunday: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394135/Ca...

Looks like South Tyneside are going to town on lawyer's fees - apparently £250k so far, according to the Mail!

This always irks me about any public body - they seem to have completely bottomless pockets when it comes to taking legal action.

[petemurphy]

Deva Link said:

This always irks me about any public body - they seem to have completely bottomless pockets when it comes to taking legal action.

had to stop reading that article - how mps are banged up for a year for 11k and yet they get away with that is staggering