Post History
(Not a lawyer) In my country at least, the law is very clear: truth cannot be libel. However, for something to be considered "truth", you'd need undisputable proof, you'd need evidence, the truth ...
Answer
#4: Attribution notice removed
by
System
·
2019-12-12T21:57:32Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/41329 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T10:36:25Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/41329 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
(Not a lawyer) In my country at least, the law is very clear: truth cannot be libel. However, for something to be considered "truth", you'd need undisputable proof, you'd need evidence, the truth would need to be attestable. Now what would you intend to prove, and how would you prove it? If the person in question is a Wiccan or a LaVeyan Satanist, that's their religion, they have every right to follow it. Claiming that there's something wrong with following any particular religion is a whole other can of worms - it's religious discrimination and hate speech, and would get you sued on that ground. If you intend to prove that the person "cast the evil eye" on someone, or caused milk to sour, or flew on a broomstick, that would be quite hard to prove, and would be quite a surprise to the scientific world if you succeeded.
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2019-01-15T16:42:48Z (almost 6 years ago)
Original score: 4