by Paul Jacobson (@pauljacobson) The Oscar Pistorius case has enthralled South Africans who are torn between supporting their hero and their disappointment at seemingly being let down by a South African icon. The discussion has practically overwhelmed my Twitter stream and people have expressed opinions on Pistorius’ guilt and innocence well before a court has reached any conclusions of its own.

#OscarPistorius Today’s lesson: Don’t rush to conclusions. Wait for both sides. Examine everything.

— Alex Eliseev (@alexeliseev) February 20, 2013

While our Bill of Rights gives us the right to express our opinions, our rights are not absolute and, in the context of defamation, the defamed Paul Jacobsonperson’s right to dignity often holds sway unless there are clear public policy reasons to allow the comments to stand. In this tragic case, Pistorius stands accused of murder but he hasn’t been found guilty. He is still, in our law at least, innocent. We don’t handle criminal law and leave the analysis of the criminal legal issues to the likes of David Dadic who is doing a far better job explaining some of the legal technicalities. That said, drawing conclusions about Pistorius’ guilt and publishing those conclusions online can lead to a defamation claim down the line.

In all likelihood, most of the conjecture about Pistorius’ guilt is defamatory and the question is whether those defamatory statements are justifiable and that remains to be seen. If you are engaged in a debate about the case, it may be prudent for you to be measured in your statements and avoid potentially prejudicial declarations. As William Booth, a criminal law attorney commented today for East Coast Radio

“I can understand there [are] people that are expressing horror at what happened, there are also people who are supporting Mr. Pistorius and saying he should be released on bail,” he said.

“So everything, I feel, should be said and done in a proper and objective manner, and not that one gets carried away and say things that you may actually regret later.

“Too much has been said that has no factual basis.”

Paul Jacobson is founder and director of Web•Tech•Law. Web•Tech•Law / CC BY-SA 2.5

– Industry news you’ll make time for. Sign up for our free newsletter!


Published by Herman Manson is edited by Herman Manson. Follow us on Twitter -

4 replies on “Tech Law: Your Oscar Pistorius conjecture could get you sued”

  1. Lets look at the obvious: the guy shot and killed someone. There was no warning shot. He doesn’t have a gun license. If this was anyone else, they’d be in jail. Bugger the technicalities, the spin doctors and the loop holes they’re squirming through- the guy is a killer. If I shot and killed an unarmed burglar not threatening me in my own home, I’d go to jail. Bazinga.

Comments are closed.

Online CPD Courses Psychology Online CPD Courses Marketing analytics software Marketing analytics software for small business Business management software Business accounting software Gearbox repair company Makeup artist