'97 16:14 TIBCOOLD HK GOWT
性
monponsible for the publication actually knew that the news
2016002 or ook1 10 that rogard are the most aero
t the area where the nood for a check da frontat
The difficulty is a practical one.
titl
wery rarely be possible to prove what the defendant's state of
nowledge w [Mr. Martin Lee, who is sware of this objection to
his proposal, says that the prosecution can rely on a confession by
the defendant or on oiroumstantial evidence to prove his story, for
example if one newspaper published the etory and so others did,
might be inferred that it had been published with knowledge of its
falsity. In my view that is simply not the case.
F.10
As far as a confession goes, those responsible for the
publication will almost certainly have access to good legal advice,
havOADCOND
and that advice will be to exercise the right of silence. Faced with
schuld be jus
that silence, it is hard to see what other line of inquiry the poTICS-
HELL-50-SDIS To puraka, je regarde the suggestion that the defendant's
amtel state can be inferred from such circumstantial evidence as what
other papers or broadoastors may or may not have published, it has to be remembered that every part of the prosecution's case must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. The mere fact that no other zevspaper hae published the news would fall for short of that. Scoops os anà de happen without there being any presumption that the story is false, still less that the newspaper producers knew it was false. Therefore
F
a if it is subsequently shown that the story was false, no infereN A
can be drawn that the publisher knew it was false. Therefore, if the