Thursday, 15 October 2009

BCA Defame Simon Singh

In an incredible press release published either yesterday or earlier today, the British Chiropractic Association made the serious and completely groundless accusation that Simon Singh had been motivated by malice in writing his original article.

This press release has now been hastily and silently switched for a modified one which does not make this significant allegation of improper conduct. However, the hardrives of dozens of Twitterers will evidence that this allegation was indeed published.

I have emailed the BCA and their PR company for an explanation of this false accusation, which had not previously been part of the BCA case.

Indeed, Lord Justice Laws had been careful to note in his judgment yesterday that there had been no allegation of malice or question of bad faith.

If Simon Singh now chooses to sue the BCA they will have to justify their allegation as a fact. They would not be able to do so.

And the BCA will know that what they intended to write will not help them.

After all, as Mr Justice Eady himself pointed out in the original adverse ruling on meaning (paragraph 11):

"As so often in libel cases, it is necessary to focus on what was actually published rather than on what might have been published."

It may be that Simon refuses to counter sue and allows the BCA to happily continue with their case. That is entirely a matter for him.

But, in my view, the moment he chooses to do so will surely be when this case ends.

That really was a misconceived press release.


No comments on this post as I am awaiting BCA response to my email.


Ross said...

Interestingly the link to the old press release still works in case anyone wants to get a copy of it.

Josh said...

If, since the appeal to allow the appeal was approved, the BCA has become scared of losing this suit against Mr Singh, and is now more scared of the publicity fallout from that, wouldn't this be a perfect way for them to 'slip' and create a false bargaining chip for Mr Singh to encourage discussing a settlement again, i.e. they drop the case. Which is what they could potentially wish for at this point anyway?

I know it straddles the line between clever politics and conspiracy, but I'm wondering your opinion.

heng said...

The link from yesterday is still live to the document with the wording "the BCA was maliciously attacked by Dr. Singh in the Guardian newspaper".

Anonymous said...

I have this evening 22:25 BST witnessed on the BCA website both versions of the document and have copies to my hard drive.

You should get a signed witness of both right now, they're still up:



How very bizarre and very amateur.

Dr Aust said...

It's been a while. Any word yet?

Silex said...

Subluxation-it should be so obvious as to not require all this evidence