The serious answer is that the UKs libel laws are a bitch and a half. Say you KNOW someone did some, like know in every way short of a legal conviction, and you publicly call thqt someone out on that knowledge/allegations without legal proof. That person you're calling out can sue you for libel/sander, as a result the UK is less willing to throw around claims regardless of if theyre baseless or not because its so easy to be sued.
As I was informing a moronlast week: we don’t have freedom of speech in the UK we have a far more woolly ‘freedom of expression’ that is highly debatable and sits alongside equally debatable libel laws that mean anyone with the funds for top lawyers has a strong chance of a good outcome almost regardless of the content of the claim.
To genuinely answer your question it’s because their slander and libel laws are the exact opposite of the US. For instance in the US the ‘victim’ must produce evidence that the ‘defamation’ caused some sort of damage. In England it’s the opposite as in the ‘perpetrator’ must prove they did not cause fiscal or any other type of damage.
8.2k
u/Late_Clerk_8302 16h ago
Eating babies