I have no choice but to bring this issue to Court!!
I had a few people confronting me of the assault of a Police Officer but they never read the correction...:(..
It would be the same as me writing the Irvings caught with little girl and I regret the error the next day..
All they have to do is apologize on the front page and this MIGHT save a lot of hardship!!!
P.S. Look at the difference between the letters from both stories...letters are VERY tiny in the apology one....not right....
What kind of Micky Mouse retraction is that! This is a serious so called "Error". what was it written 8pts, you need a magnifying glass to even read it let alone see it Also the positioning is not in a location on the page that the eye first sees. I't looks like the Daily Gleaner children a playing the technical game. Meaning doing the minimum requirement of retraction notification.
ReplyDeleteMaybe a DDOS (denial of Service) is about do on the Irving servers - The only way to make a capitalist understand is to hit them in the pocket book.
> We are Anonymous.
> We are Legion.
> We do not Forgive.
> We do not Forget.
> EXPECT US!
12:41 I think you are the idiot. Not only was the headline wrong, so were the facts in the alleged court report. The real issue is how the "court reporter" could even publish a report when he wasn't at the hearing! (He flounced out in a drama queen tantrum before the hearing started.) Anyone who is subject to serious defamation - like the false accusation of assaulting a police officer - has the right to be upset and angry. The Irving employees need to start understanding the intense pressure innocent people like Charles are under, when sucked into criminal proceedings that should never have been started. They throw fuel on the fire with their negligence and incompetence.
ReplyDeleteChuckles is trying to milk everyone and everything for money. Occupy Fredericton got their payday, now he wants his.
ReplyDeleteThat's a standard newspaper retraction, and you will get zero, zip, nada if/when you sue them. I guarantee it.
I hardly think $14,000 was any kind of payday. Financial penalties are supposed to be awarded to deter sloppy, negligent and purposeful wrongdoing that impacts a person's reputation or quality of life.
ReplyDeletegood luck you idiots trying some kind of litigation against the Irving's...even if it got to court they would have you tied up until the day you die...Charles cant find a lawyer to help him against the justice system....frigging good luck against the Irving family....
ReplyDeleteCharles the victim of "serious defamation" - good lord, pot calling the kettle black there. Charles does nothing but defame others all day, every day on this very blog, and has been doing so for years - way before the issues with his place being raided or Bernard Richard reports...... I think the Gleaner is a crap paper, but I'm certain their headline did nothing to further "damage" Charles' stellar reputation......
ReplyDeleteNo self respecting lawyer will touch Charles with a ten foot pole.
ReplyDeleteIt never ceases to amaze me how content people in NB are to live with such low standards of competence and service, from government and so called professionals, and then bash anyone trying to stand up and make things better. That is why the province is getting more corrupt by the day.
ReplyDeleteYou defame people all the time, and you have for years...Should these people all sue you ? Your on your own buddy, we dont care for ya...
ReplyDelete2209...surely you are not attempting to say that you Charles and the few followers are trying to `UP` the standards of New Brunswick.....you are joking for sure...if you want to do that...leave the province that would be a start
ReplyDelete2231 ... Obviously you havent been reading his blog ... All he does is defame people .. Lol.. Poor you..
ReplyDeleteIt makes me sick to see all the negative posts on Charles' Blog. One would think this city is nothing but "let's get this guy" because he does good things for others less fortunate. Wake up people - you don't seem to know the difference between goodness and evil.
ReplyDeleteFor the negative commentators: I think you have forgotten the FPFarce failed to criminally charge Charles for defamatory libel, on the grounds he knows and believes what he writes. Others have experienced the same.
ReplyDeleteOh 12:02 you don't actually understand what defamation is. We are all LOL at you!
ReplyDelete17:32 - actually the FPF DID charge him with Defamatory Libel, the charges ended up not being approved/dropped by the Crown due to some issues around if that charge under the criminal code is constitutionally viable or not. It has nothing to do with Charles believing what he writes or not. If someone were to bother bringing a lawsuit against Charles in Civil Court, they would most likely win a libel suit - but what would be the point? Charles can't pay damages anyway so it would REALLY be a waste of everyone's time. - at 14:11 - Charles' blog used to do some good for people who really didn't have a voice, and while his "reporting style" was never the best in fact checking he at least attempted to give voice to those ignored by main stream media. This is not really the case anymore - over the last 5 years or so his blog has turned into more of a joke than anything else. He runs around calling people names, making a complete nuisance of himself and what credibility he may have once had is completely gone. Sure he has some supporters on here,, but more people come here just to ready what silly far fetched scheme he's cooked up that day. Instead of helping people like he says he wants to, Charles does more to hurt the poor and underprivileged now as there is no-one in any position to help or make changes who takes anything he says seriously.
ReplyDeleteAs far as this assault trial goes, bottom line, Charles is guilty - he threw the first punch and struck the other person with a closed fist - that is assault. He can claim he was provoked, but based on how Charles interacts with just about everyone, it's just as likely that he provoked Spencer. Either way, neither one of them have any credibility, but Charles has admitted more than once that he struck him. Do I think Charles should go to jail as he seems to think a guilty outcome will lead to? No, it's a minor assault and certainly not worth jail time. Maybe both Charles and the general public would be best served with Charles having to do some community service and call it a day. He doesn't have the resources to pay a fine, he doesn't deserve jail time, and he actually seems to enjoy helping people when he's in the mood, so why not have him serve food at the Community Kitchen or something? It's not really a hardship for Charles, it helps the kitchen out, and "Justice" can be served...... but both Charles and the Crown need to stop wasting everyone's time and money.
You are wrong - Charles did not throw the first "punch" and there seems to be evidence it was not with a closed fist. Self defense is not assault. If this ridiculous charge leads to a conviction it will endorse that abusive people, like Andrew Spencer, can walk the streets drunk and high, do anything they want and be protected by misused tax dollars, while jeopardising reputations and liberty of innocent people.
DeleteAs for your ignorant comments about the defamatory libel charge, you must have been in a coma when it was reported. The point was the FPFarce specifically chose an unconstitutional section of the Criminal Code, to pursue Charles for exactly the reason that it did not require the publisher to believe what he said/wrote. Law professors across the country, and the CCLA, all voiced their united opinion the FPF conduct was unacceptable. The Bernard Richard report also found the police should not have pursued this charge, since the matter was a complaint by one of their own Farce (conflict of interests) and was for the officer to take to civil court, not criminal. We are seeing history repeat itself: tens to hundreds of thousands of tax dollars spent on police, GNB and City revenge against Charles.
21:52 You are a total numbscull; must be a cop or Crown, or Irving press.
ReplyDeleteI'm totally with 10:37 - perfect summary of 21:52.
ReplyDelete