Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Politics
»
Apostle William Samoei Ruto
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/10/2008 Posts: 9,131 Location: Kanjo
|
Mambo ya JJ na Tax returns inagusaniana wapi niulize? i.am.back!!!!
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 1/7/2010 Posts: 1,279 Location: nbi
|
Some might be a bit slow. Ruta says Mwangi defamed him. All Mwangi has to prove is that there is no way he can call a pig a dog. Looks like one, smells like one, must be one... The Governor of Nyeri - 2017
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 2/26/2012 Posts: 15,980
|
Wa_ithaka wrote:Some might be a bit slow. Ruta says Mwangi defamed him. All Mwangi has to prove is that there is no way he can call a pig a dog. Looks like one, smells like one, must be one... The law does not work like that my friend. We may not be lawyers but what is happening here is a choice of battles. Mwangi has no license to defame Ruto just because someone else said the same thing without substantiating the claims. What is happening is mudslinging now the onus remains with the judge to choose if he will be party to it. This is what Ahmednasir thinks "There are only two emotions in the market, hope & fear. The problem is you hope when you should fear & fear when you should hope: - Jesse Livermore
.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 9/19/2015 Posts: 2,871 Location: hapo
|
murchr wrote:Wa_ithaka wrote:Some might be a bit slow. Ruta says Mwangi defamed him. All Mwangi has to prove is that there is no way he can call a pig a dog. Looks like one, smells like one, must be one... The law does not work like that my friend. We may not be lawyers but what is happening here is a choice of battles. Mwangi has no license to defame Ruto just because someone else said the same thing without substantiating the claims. What is happening is mudslinging now the onus remains with the judge to choose if he will be party to it. This is what Ahmednasir thinks Please understand bwana murchr that you suggesting that Gitobu is doing this for x or Y reason is also subject to a defamation case. This is not a criminal proceeding but a civil suit The plaintiff MUST prove his case which includes the FAME he claims That is why good lawyers many a times advise their clients not to sue in many situations. Ask Trump and trying to sue the New York Times. In many of these cases, the very reason for the suit never shows up in court. Yes its mudslinging and if Ruto was advised otherwise, he should get other lawyers. The best advise for Ruto would have been to ignore a noisemaker as they call him to continue tweeting. The very imagining that Boni is going to play Mr. Nice Guy in this one is a joke. He shall and his lawyers will bring all the mud to prove that Ruto's fame is negative not as positive as he may want wazuans to think. Maybe the lawyers here shall confirm or deny Task 1 is to prove that Ruto has any fame. Saying he's DP isn't enough. He must have some fame to defend. So he must prove that he's as good as he claims he is. Task 2. There shall be an award. It's up to the defence to ensure that even if they lose the case, the award is minimal So don't be surprised if Ruto wins the case but gets $1 as award. After all, Boni may show that his fame is so bad its only worth cents. So every piece of mud they can get on him is fair play. Grab some popcorn. Thieves are not good people. Tumeelewana?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 2/26/2012 Posts: 15,980
|
alma1 wrote:murchr wrote:Wa_ithaka wrote:Some might be a bit slow. Ruta says Mwangi defamed him. All Mwangi has to prove is that there is no way he can call a pig a dog. Looks like one, smells like one, must be one... The law does not work like that my friend. We may not be lawyers but what is happening here is a choice of battles. Mwangi has no license to defame Ruto just because someone else said the same thing without substantiating the claims. What is happening is mudslinging now the onus remains with the judge to choose if he will be party to it. This is what Ahmednasir thinks Please understand bwana murchr that you suggesting that Gitobu is doing this for x or Y reason is also subject to a defamation case. This is not a criminal proceeding but a civil suit The plaintiff MUST prove his case which includes the FAME he claims That is why good lawyers many a times advise their clients not to sue in many situations. Ask Trump and trying to sue the New York Times. In many of these cases, the very reason for the suit never shows up in court. Yes its mudslinging and if Ruto was advised otherwise, he should get other lawyers. The best advise for Ruto would have been to ignore a noisemaker as they call him to continue tweeting. The very imagining that Boni is going to play Mr. Nice Guy in this one is a joke. He shall and his lawyers will bring all the mud to prove that Ruto's fame is negative not as positive as he may want wazuans to think. Maybe the lawyers here shall confirm or deny Task 1 is to prove that Ruto has any fame. Saying he's DP isn't enough. He must have some fame to defend. So he must prove that he's as good as he claims he is. Task 2. There shall be an award. It's up to the defence to ensure that even if they lose the case, the award is minimal So don't be surprised if Ruto wins the case but gets $1 as award. After all, Boni may show that his fame is so bad its only worth cents. So every piece of mud they can get on him is fair play. Grab some popcorn. Stop getting complicated. This is no rocket science. There are so many cases in court about these people you can read so go online and search, this behaviour of bloggers assasinating other peoples character or lynching them online so that they can build their own profile need to be curtailed. Nyakundi vs SafaricomNation MediaNyakundi vs National Bank Mutunga vs StandardAlai vs Safcom Alai vs Alfie when he was the spokesman - How did that one go? All in all, lawyers are here to eat, ndovu zishindane ku---you know Na kathalika "There are only two emotions in the market, hope & fear. The problem is you hope when you should fear & fear when you should hope: - Jesse Livermore
.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 2/8/2013 Posts: 4,068 Location: At Large.
|
I am not a lawyer nor do I have compelling points for or against this case. However I am sure this is not the way to earn a slot in the Mashujaa list. Somebody needs to advise him to stop before its too late.🙏🙏 With the tax returns demand,its no longer about JJ murder...... Meanwhile now that we have mentioned JJ,did the touch go off or it running on energizer that goes on and on and on.... Love is beautiful and so are those who share it.With Love, Marriage is an amazing event in ones life time, the foundation of joy, happiness and success.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 9/19/2015 Posts: 2,871 Location: hapo
|
murchr wrote:alma1 wrote:murchr wrote:Wa_ithaka wrote:Some might be a bit slow. Ruta says Mwangi defamed him. All Mwangi has to prove is that there is no way he can call a pig a dog. Looks like one, smells like one, must be one... The law does not work like that my friend. We may not be lawyers but what is happening here is a choice of battles. Mwangi has no license to defame Ruto just because someone else said the same thing without substantiating the claims. What is happening is mudslinging now the onus remains with the judge to choose if he will be party to it. This is what Ahmednasir thinks Please understand bwana murchr that you suggesting that Gitobu is doing this for x or Y reason is also subject to a defamation case. This is not a criminal proceeding but a civil suit The plaintiff MUST prove his case which includes the FAME he claims That is why good lawyers many a times advise their clients not to sue in many situations. Ask Trump and trying to sue the New York Times. In many of these cases, the very reason for the suit never shows up in court. Yes its mudslinging and if Ruto was advised otherwise, he should get other lawyers. The best advise for Ruto would have been to ignore a noisemaker as they call him to continue tweeting. The very imagining that Boni is going to play Mr. Nice Guy in this one is a joke. He shall and his lawyers will bring all the mud to prove that Ruto's fame is negative not as positive as he may want wazuans to think. Maybe the lawyers here shall confirm or deny Task 1 is to prove that Ruto has any fame. Saying he's DP isn't enough. He must have some fame to defend. So he must prove that he's as good as he claims he is. Task 2. There shall be an award. It's up to the defence to ensure that even if they lose the case, the award is minimal So don't be surprised if Ruto wins the case but gets $1 as award. After all, Boni may show that his fame is so bad its only worth cents. So every piece of mud they can get on him is fair play. Grab some popcorn. Stop getting complicated. This is no rocket science. There are so many cases in court about these people you can read so go online and search, this behaviour of bloggers assasinating other peoples character or lynching them online so that they can build their own profile need to be curtailed. Nyakundi vs SafaricomNation MediaNyakundi vs National Bank Mutunga vs StandardAlai vs Safcom Alai vs Alfie when he was the spokesman - How did that one go? All in all, lawyers are here to eat, ndovu zishindane ku---you know Na kathalika Thank God that law about assassinating someone's character is forgotten. That is what politicians used to use to take people to Nyayo house. Then the same politicians tried that one about "using communication gadgets". We know what happened to that one too. Please advise wazuans which of those cases you just mentioned ended up with anyone going to jail. Infact from what I've seen, those "bloggers" bought cars. None of them are in jail. That includes Itumbi. The lawyers who ate are the ones who advised their companies and clients to take the cases to court. From what I've seen Boni is the only one with a lawyer. The rest even their families ignored them but still those corporates have not won a damn thing. And that's a criminal case. Now civil...you are joking. Yes, Boni has every right to call upon everything about the character of DP Ruto. Ruto must prove he has a character that needs protecting. That is what its all about. We of course on chocho mendia have the right to tell Boni he's fighting with an elephant. Boni has the right to disagree. Or are you afraid that he may have a point? Thieves are not good people. Tumeelewana?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 12/7/2012 Posts: 11,939
|
On the current happenings I think BM is trying the impossible. Let us wait and see. In the business world, everyone is paid in two coins - cash and experience. Take the experience first; the cash will come later - H Geneen
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 8/15/2015 Posts: 817
|
huyu mjamaa anatafuta nini kisii!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 2/26/2012 Posts: 15,980
|
alma1 wrote:murchr wrote:alma1 wrote:murchr wrote:Wa_ithaka wrote:Some might be a bit slow. Ruta says Mwangi defamed him. All Mwangi has to prove is that there is no way he can call a pig a dog. Looks like one, smells like one, must be one... The law does not work like that my friend. We may not be lawyers but what is happening here is a choice of battles. Mwangi has no license to defame Ruto just because someone else said the same thing without substantiating the claims. What is happening is mudslinging now the onus remains with the judge to choose if he will be party to it. This is what Ahmednasir thinks Please understand bwana murchr that you suggesting that Gitobu is doing this for x or Y reason is also subject to a defamation case. This is not a criminal proceeding but a civil suit The plaintiff MUST prove his case which includes the FAME he claims That is why good lawyers many a times advise their clients not to sue in many situations. Ask Trump and trying to sue the New York Times. In many of these cases, the very reason for the suit never shows up in court. Yes its mudslinging and if Ruto was advised otherwise, he should get other lawyers. The best advise for Ruto would have been to ignore a noisemaker as they call him to continue tweeting. The very imagining that Boni is going to play Mr. Nice Guy in this one is a joke. He shall and his lawyers will bring all the mud to prove that Ruto's fame is negative not as positive as he may want wazuans to think. Maybe the lawyers here shall confirm or deny Task 1 is to prove that Ruto has any fame. Saying he's DP isn't enough. He must have some fame to defend. So he must prove that he's as good as he claims he is. Task 2. There shall be an award. It's up to the defence to ensure that even if they lose the case, the award is minimal So don't be surprised if Ruto wins the case but gets $1 as award. After all, Boni may show that his fame is so bad its only worth cents. So every piece of mud they can get on him is fair play. Grab some popcorn. Stop getting complicated. This is no rocket science. There are so many cases in court about these people you can read so go online and search, this behaviour of bloggers assasinating other peoples character or lynching them online so that they can build their own profile need to be curtailed. Nyakundi vs SafaricomNation MediaNyakundi vs National Bank Mutunga vs StandardAlai vs Safcom Alai vs Alfie when he was the spokesman - How did that one go? All in all, lawyers are here to eat, ndovu zishindane ku---you know Na kathalika Thank God that law about assassinating someone's character is forgotten. That is what politicians used to use to take people to Nyayo house. Then the same politicians tried that one about "using communication gadgets". We know what happened to that one too. Please advise wazuans which of those cases you just mentioned ended up with anyone going to jail. Infact from what I've seen, those "bloggers" bought cars. None of them are in jail. That includes Itumbi. The lawyers who ate are the ones who advised their companies and clients to take the cases to court. From what I've seen Boni is the only one with a lawyer. The rest even their families ignored them but still those corporates have not won a damn thing. And that's a criminal case. Now civil...you are joking. Yes, Boni has every right to call upon everything about the character of DP Ruto. Ruto must prove he has a character that needs protecting. That is what its all about. We of course on chocho mendia have the right to tell Boni he's fighting with an elephant. Boni has the right to disagree. Or are you afraid that he may have a point? Hahaha...Stop foaming on the mouth. 1. Ruto is the VP of Kenya with intentions of being President. 2. Ruto has NOT been convicted of killing JJ or anyone else...so bringing up PEV is non-consequential. So Ruto has not committed the felony of Murder. 3. The other allegations have BM has to prove that WSR has been convicted in a court of law. Again, google this is another case Quote:In an action for defamation, the claimant must establish three things. Firstly, that the words complained of are defamatory, that is, they tend to lower the claimant’s reputation in the estimation of right thinking members of society; secondly, that the words refer to the Claimant and finally, that the words are malicious. It is not in dispute that the words complained of referred to the Plaintiff. The issue is whether those words were defamatory. The words complained of alleged lack of integrity on the part of the Plaintiff’ On malice, Odunga J held in Phineas Nyagah Vs Gitobu Imanyara (2013) eKLR that:- “Evidence of malice may be found in the publication itself if the language used is utterly beyond or disproportionate to the facts. That may lead to an inference of malice. ........ Malice may also be inferred from the relations between the parties.......
The failure to inquire in the facts is a fact from which inference of malice may properly be drawn.” From the evidence on record, it is clear that upon receiving the article from anonymous sources, the Defendant did not seek to verify the authenticity of the contents thereof before republication. When asked to remove the same, the Defendant declined and further published to what it called “the regulatory authorities”.... It is also not in dispute that the Defendant then posted it to its website http://www.cofek.co.ke, Facebook and Twitter Accounts. It is further not disputed that the Defendant has followers on its Website, Facebook and Twitter accounts. In my view, by posting the offending article on its Website, Facebook and Twitter accounts, the Defendant had published the article. Gatley on Libel and Slander 9th Edition Sweet & Maxwell 1998 at pages 150 – 152 have observed that:-
“At common law every republication of a libel is a new libel and, if committed by different persons, each one is liable as if the defamatory statement had originated with him.................
To say that a person who repeats a defamatory allegation originated by another is liable is not to say that nature and extent of his liability is the same as that of the originator. “The nature and quality of the defamatory publication may vary, dependent upon whether it is a report of what another has said and whether it is adopted, repudiated or discounted. The purpose of the republication will also have a significant bearing. ...... When a defamatory publication purports to repeat or report the defamatory statement of another it is an essentially different libel from one where the same imputation is conveyed directly. It may require to be charged or defended differently..... it may also be relevant on damages.” "There are only two emotions in the market, hope & fear. The problem is you hope when you should fear & fear when you should hope: - Jesse Livermore
.
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Politics
»
Apostle William Samoei Ruto
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|