Justice Norris says, “The things stated were acts of deliberate cruelty to children suffering from fits, an ill-regulated supply of food, insufficient clothing, mismanagement, and a lack of oversight which allowed the institution to become a brothel. As well as suggestions Miss Pigot was too familiar with a native pleader and flirtatious with a married Scotchman. Yet he took no action until he received these letters. Clearly there is evidence of malice, and a jury might have found a verdict for the plaintiff. But...”
But? There’s a but? I don’t understand. You just said the statements constitute libel. And he sent them on, so he’s guilty. How can there be a but? I feel myself stiffen
Click Follow to receive emails when this author adds content on Bublish
Comment on this Bubble
Your comment and a link to this bubble will also appear in your Facebook feed.