topic Re: school principal wins defamation case in Community Spirit

school principal wins defamation case

davidc4430 — Fri, 28 Feb 2020 20:22:46 GMT

Mount Tamborine school principal wins defamation case over parents' social media posts

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-28/mount-tambourine-school-principal-wins-defamation-case-brose/12010268

Re: school principal wins defamation case

springyzone — Fri, 28 Feb 2020 22:31:54 GMT

I'd like to talk about the broader issue of media defamation, rather than just this case in particular.

Comments on various websites can be absolutely brutal and sometimes vicious. I have seen this is action, over & over.

Some years ago I was on another messageboard where things got out of hand this way and one woman came in for so much negative comment she went to see a solicitor.

She was told that legally, people could be sued if their comments identified her and could reasonably be expected to affect her livelihood or business. Since she was under a nick on the messageboard and no business had been identified, it would not be worth her while pursuing it.

One of the men was similarly attacked but his name was known and one of the boardies discovered his business & associates and sent very vicious emails to all his business partners. The man (in US) did get legal help and the emails were traced to Tasmania and although we all knew who must have done it, the man was unable to trace it to the exact person. Had he been able to prove it though, he certainly could (and would) have taken it further.

In the link you gave, david, the woman's identity was known and that was her job & her reputation at stake.

I worked in a school once where some parents gossiped about one of the male teachers, claiming he was a big drinker, could be drunk on duty etc. it started with one parent but she spread it.

His response was to have a solicitor send her a warning letter, to say that if she kept it up, he would take the matter to court.

It stopped it in its tracks. Our prin wasn't keen that a teacher had taken independent action without going through him, he didn't like parents to be handled with anything but kitten gloves. But staff thought it was good. The man wasn't a drunk and never at work intoxicated. It was a total falsehood. And it was his job at stake.

People need to be careful what they put on social media.

Re: school principal wins defamation case

davidc4430 — Fri, 28 Feb 2020 23:14:52 GMT

if anyone has an issue with anyone else there are legal ways to go about raising those issues

going on the internet or social media and starting rumors and gossip works too,

but be warned, take that route and you could wind up in court

and lose

and be ruined yourself.

think long and hard before 'going it alone'

these silly people have been given a lesson that'll prolly ruin then

if $600,000 court costs is anywhere near the mark.

they prolly should have settled 'out of court' like the others did.

i for one would love to hear how this ends

Re: school principal wins defamation case

martinw-48 — Fri, 28 Feb 2020 23:26:24 GMT

I think if you had an issue with the principal of your childs school it'd be best to see them in person and try and achieve a resolution

Re: school principal wins defamation case

k1ooo-slr-sales — Fri, 28 Feb 2020 23:33:30 GMT

@davidc4430 wrote:

i for one would love to hear how this ends

watch 60 minutes this Sunday. They are promo’ing this story.

Re: school principal wins defamation case

k1ooo-slr-sales — Fri, 28 Feb 2020 23:57:38 GMT

I read an online news story about this the other day. I’ll look for it again so I can post a link.

One of these parents did go to the principal’s house at night. He demanded to talk to her and was very aggressive. The family called police and were advised to video the man until police arrived. He bashed a screen door so hard that it broke the glass in the main door. He left the property and passed the police as they made their way to the house.

In the 60 minutes ad you can see door glass breaking. Hopefully that is actual footage and not a re-creation.

**edit** most of the online stories are from Qld newspapers, and you have to subscribe to access them. The snippets in the search results do mention the breaking down of the door.

Re: school principal wins defamation case

chameleon54 — Sat, 29 Feb 2020 01:59:19 GMT

@springyzone wrote:
I'd like to talk about the broader issue of media defamation, rather than just this case in particular.

Comments on various websites can be absolutely brutal and sometimes vicious. I have seen this is action, over & over.
Some years ago I was on another messageboard where things got out of hand this way and one woman came in for so much negative comment she went to see a solicitor.
She was told that legally, people could be sued if their comments identified her and could reasonably be expected to affect her livelihood or business. Since she was under a nick on the messageboard and no business had been identified, it would not be worth her while pursuing it.

One of the men was similarly attacked but his name was known and one of the boardies discovered his business & associates and sent very vicious emails to all his business partners. The man (in US) did get legal help and the emails were traced to Tasmania and although we all knew who must have done it, the man was unable to trace it to the exact person. Had he been able to prove it though, he certainly could (and would) have taken it further.

In the link you gave, david, the woman's identity was known and that was her job & her reputation at stake.
I worked in a school once where some parents gossiped about one of the male teachers, claiming he was a big drinker, could be drunk on duty etc. it started with one parent but she spread it.
His response was to have a solicitor send her a warning letter, to say that if she kept it up, he would take the matter to court.
It stopped it in its tracks. Our prin wasn't keen that a teacher had taken independent action without going through him, he didn't like parents to be handled with anything but kitten gloves. But staff thought it was good. The man wasn't a drunk and never at work intoxicated. It was a total falsehood. And it was his job at stake.

People need to be careful what they put on social media.

Thankyou for a very pertinent and well considered post springy. Posters on another thread currently running on these forums would do well to consider the points you have raised. I warned another serial offender only a day or two ago that her posts where verging on being defamatory and yes the thought of pursuing legal action DID cross my mind for a brief moment.

Of more concern is the defamatory comments being made in regards to the immolation murder / suicide on another thread. There are a large number of posts directly saying that previous to this unfortunate event the father committed domestic violence against his family. While allegations of DV have been formally made, the sequence of events leading up to the incident, reported in the media raise serious questions as to whether a court has found the accusations to be valid.

What we do know is the father was accused of DV and an interim restraining order was granted. These are exactly what they say. An interim order made at the point of accusation, often banning contact with the person claiming to be the victim. The order will either be ratified or dismissed once the case has gone to a full court to be properly assessed. This can take many months or even years, during which time the father ( in this case ) can not have contact with his children.

What has also been reported and noted by responders to the thread is that the courts had just finalised their review of the accusations and then granted the father access to the children. While family court matters are not publicly disclosed, the fact that the court did not uphold the ban on the father from seeing his children, suggests things are not as straight forward as some would have us believe. ie. the claims of DV where not substantiated in court.

This does not sit well with those who have chosen to denigrate and vilify anyone who points this out. From the senior detective removed from the case, the commentator pilloried by some and any responder to the community forum thread who dares to question the lynch mob mentality.

People need to be a little more careful before engaging in defamatory remarks on any form of social media. The courts are becoming much more active in demanding organisations hand over details of posters and you never know who might decide to sue.

Re: school principal wins defamation case

crikey*mate — Sat, 29 Feb 2020 02:30:58 GMT

There were no proceedings before the Court, not even the Family Court at the time of Baxter's Homicides

Re: school principal wins defamation case

davewil1964 — Sat, 29 Feb 2020 07:12:30 GMT

So it was either -

No DVO;

A court lifted the DVO (they are the only ones who can. The police and the complainant can't);

The temporary DVO expired with no further action by the police or complainant;

He was in breach of a DVO.

Which one? You seem well-versed in the facts of the matter.

A belated welcome back. We knew who you were a week or more ago.

Re: school principal wins defamation case

crikey*mate — Sat, 29 Feb 2020 08:36:32 GMT

@Dave *waves* I'm on mobile view. It took until last night to work out how to change my name to Crikey.

LOL What're you doing in these parts of the woods? You said you'd never venture over here!

Re: school principal wins defamation case

imastawka — Sat, 29 Feb 2020 08:41:15 GMT

Dave lied - he's enjoying it.

But Baxter comments shouldn't be on this thread.

It's confusing.

This thread is about the school principal

Re: school principal wins defamation case

crikey*mate — Sat, 29 Feb 2020 08:50:09 GMT

@Dave

I only know of the one DVO arising from taking the child.He was allegedly in breach of the DVO for contacting Hannah - NFI how shared custody was to be arranged - was due to appear in magistrates court in March for that breach

Re: school principal wins defamation case

performance_parts_clearance_centre — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 02:45:12 GMT

At the risk of getting back on-topic...

The internet - and especially social media - are seen by the great unwashed as being the last great bastion of free speech, aka "I can anything I want and youse can't stop me 'cos it's teh Internet, ay". It's the whole "keyboard warrior" routine - all manner of foul, vile stuff will be posted because those posting it think they're untouchable. When challenged, they fall back on the "I'm entitled to express my opinion" / 'freedom of speech" mantra.

And, it's not the case. An opinion can easily be defamatory, and "my opinion" doesn't really cut it as a legal defence. If the person being defamed is willing to stump up the bucks necessary, an internet troll can be sued.

Re: school principal wins defamation case

joz*garage — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 02:57:23 GMT

Why was the principal suspended that time, and why was she attacked?

Re: school principal wins defamation case

ambercat16 — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 07:43:23 GMT

@joz*garage wrote:
Why was the principal suspended that time, and why was she attacked?

Joz I just saw this on facebook. I have no idea if it is the accurate story but generally Mamamia is pretty good........

https://mamamia.com.au/tracey-brose-60-minutes

Re: school principal wins defamation case

performance_parts_clearance_centre — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 21:41:28 GMT

Reading the various comments from Miguel Baluskas, it's just impossible to feel any sort of sympathy - even allowing for the media cherry-picking his statements to make him look bad, he still comes across as the worst type of aggressive, belligerant little sod. You get the impression that he's been threatening and bullying people most of his life.

Re: school principal wins defamation case

davidc4430 — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 22:04:44 GMT

'Outside court, Donna Baluskas cried. Miguel spoke to media, telling reporters: "You know what, I hurt people's feelings everyday. Do you see me getting sued everyday? No."'

this guy is a serious threat to that woman, he wont stop until hes in prison for murder.

cant believe he goes to the womans house, attempts to break in, and makes threats, and isnt in jail

and we wonder why DV cases end like the recent one

Re: school principal wins defamation case

freddie*rooster — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 22:14:18 GMT

You reap what you sow comes to mind.

Feral lot of trouble makers.

Re: school principal wins defamation case

davidc4430 — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 22:29:21 GMT

@joz*garage wrote:
Why was the principal suspended that time, and why was she attacked?

my best guess is when a complaint is recieved, depending on what it is, first thing the education department does is stand down the person being complained about while an investigation takes place.

i suspect this principle had some pretty outragous complaints made about her, the dept had no choice.

she was attacked because there was at least one man who thought its ok to go to her home and kick the front door in!

from his own statements seems its his way of 'sorting problems out'

'i said i would do it so i did it'

wouldnt you love to live next door to him?

Re: school principal wins defamation case

joz*garage — Tue, 03 Mar 2020 02:40:57 GMT

Strange question, & I doubt the wuss would pick on a bloke.

I simply wanted a better background story, and seems this poor lass lives in fear.