As many will know the comedian Friendly Jordies aka Jordan Shanks is being sued by the NSW deputy premier for defamation.

Will a million dollars behind him he at least will get his day in court which many people are denied.

However a the breakdown of his situation, discussed the following Youtube clip, he makes some pertinent observations about the court system and our defamation laws.

"I am getting sued for exactly the same reason that virtually every person in this country gets sued and that is because we have the exact opposite laws of the US when it comes to defamation."

http://youtu.be/CJ3vS_Xnglo

It really does reflect poorly on notions of egalitarianism when the likes of Clive Palmer can stifle any criticism by virtue of his chequebook.

I for one are hoping the court case will at least start the conversation around modifying our defamation laws.

I agree defamation laws should be changed.

I know a person in a sport who sues everyone for defamation when his federation receives a complaint about him.

He has wealth, and most back down because they do not

Dear Chris Lewis,

Yes it really is a case of the monied classes increasingly holding the upper hand in regards to free speech.

The amount of money required to safely tell anyone to truly F-off has become obscene in this country.

I do acknowledge there has been a little bit of reform but it hardly goes far enough in my opinion.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-defamation-laws-have-just-changed-in-most-of-australia-here-s-why-that-matters/1c5e2418-4150-46a2-ac90-7f181a64dab9

Dear Steele,

We need new media voices, especially ones that
are young and progressive. Time will tell how
effective his case will be. He has a large
following and is certainly in tune with many
Australians. I wish him success. However, I don't
like the odds stacked against him. I hope he's got
good lawyers, and good media coverage. He's going to
need both.

Hi Steele,

Can't JS set up a 'Cry Baby' Porter like slush fund, where secret cashed up people can contribute to his legal costs? If he was in government later on he could return the favour in some small way. ScumO' is having someone look at his own rule book to see if Porter is in order, I'm sure he'll find he is, after all he hasn't shot anyone on the floor of the parliament, which is possibly against ScumÒ' rules, but someone would have to look at that, it would be 50/50.

Bugger him. The Left is always trying to cancel the rights of free speech to conservatives. So, no sympathy for for this whine. This SR character is the leading hater and left nasty here. He has one hell of a cheek expecting sympathy for some clown he admires.

Dear Foxy,

It sure does and it is perhaps why I find him so refreshing.

Dear Paul1405,

Yes it was quite astonishing and deeply concerning. Not having to declare a donation of that size to a politician really beggars belief.

But it does reinforce the point that defamation case are the playground of the rich or the well connected.

Dear Steele,

I wish him well. Hopefully the finances he has
will cover the expenses involved. He's a brave
young man.

Dear Paul1405,

It seems the pressure on Morrison has gotten too great, he finally has forced Porter to resign from the ministry over the money from the 'anonymous donor'.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-19/christian-porter-resigns-as-minister-over-conflict-of-interest/100474754

Time will tell how long that will last. Sports rorts only saw Bridget McKenzie out for less than a year.

SR,

Due to the First Amendment guaranteeing the right to free speech, defamation is more difficult in the US than in the rest of the world,
but is still possible where statements are made with reckless disregard of the truth for example Jordan Skanks has not one iota of evidence as to the claim of corruption.

Note also that in the US Folau could not be persecuted and 18c would be scrapped. Be careful what you wish for.

Shadowminister,

I remember this from you:

"The defamation trial will force the ABC to produce everything it has got, and if on the balance of probability CP wins will you admit that the ABC got it wrong?"

Well what are the chances you will balls this up as well?

SR.

Firstly as there was no trial, I was not incorrect. Secondly, the ABC made an apology clearly stating that they never intended to imply guilt on CP and paid for the mediation because they knew that they would lose the case.

Skanks has gone far further than the ABC in directly accusing JB of corruption. Even in his submissions to the court, he has not provided a shred of proof to his "truth" defence.

I would be happy to bet that JS will not win this case.

"I would be happy to bet that JS will not win this case."

Jordan Shanks odds of winning have just shortened. The forums resident Wally Rumpole has declared for Pork Barrels! After his failed claims about 'Beat Up' Bolt and 'Cry Baby' Porter he might land the trifecta!

Pauliar,

After your continuous lying about what I said about Porter and Bolt, the fact that you support this twit has doomed him.

shonkysinister,

Why does Porter need a secret slush fund to pay his debts, when you said he was in for 10 million bucks.

Pauliar,

Because once again you are lying.

Shadowminister,

You wrote: "Firstly as there was no trial, I was not incorrect. Secondly, the ABC made an apology clearly stating that they never intended to imply guilt on CP and paid for the mediation because they knew that they would lose the case."

Porter lost the case. He withdrew it because he didn't want the materials for his case to be made public.

The ABC's story remains unchanged and online for all the world to see.

The ABC paid a small amount for mediation as it was they who sought it.

Anyway it was the case brought by the victim's friend which has cost Porter the most and is the reason why he was reduced to taking blind money and forced him to resign.

A far different result from what you predicted and hoped for isn't it.

SR,

The case cannot be lost if it hasn't been heard. The ABC declared it would mount a truth defence then ended up essentially confessing that any implication that Porter committed rape was complete bollocks.

Considering that my prediction was conditional on there being a trial and there was no trial. And I said that the trial could end up costing the ABC $10m as a similar recent trial. Again no trial.

Compare this to your crowing about Pell's guilt just before he was exonerated.

The skanks trial will be more of a slam dunk considering that JS is continuing accusing JB of corruption without a shred of evidence.

Totally agree SR, SM declared that the Porter action would result in $10+ million plus compensation for Porter, a grovelling apology from the ABC, and 100 ABC employees sacked to pay for it all. In his true Wally Rumpole style when found to be wrong, which is more often than not, he goes into denial. Over the years on the Forum he has made many such frivolous claims, and when exposed as wrong simply lies, or retreats to a position of fanciful spin. Years back when I questioned the bona fides of Andrew Bolt in the "Beat Up" Bolt saga SM was quick to thunder that an arrest of left-wing radicals was "imminent", when no such arrests transpired good old Wally Rumpole retreated into denial as per usual. Then releasing his vitriol on me for questioning his buffoonery, going to the extreme of accusing me of being a paedophile.

Pauliar,

Once again you are a lying troll. I never said any of these things.

However, I suppose that this is the typical fraudulent activity one can expect of pedogreens.