Michael E Mann, Loser

The War on Free Speech

By Mark Steyn September 17, 2019

At the turn of the century, Michael E Mann's "climate change" hockey stick was the world's most famous and instantly recognizable scientific graph, tirelessly promoted by UN propagandists and mailed by governments around the world to each of their citizens as the pretext for whatever warmist boondoggle they had in mind. The hockey stick is a crock - but Mann likes to sue if you point that out, and enviable sinecures such as the high office of personal climatologist to Jessica Alba have ensured he has apparently bottomless pockets.

Nevertheless, a few weeks ago, the indefatigable Anthony Watts broke the news that Dr Tim Ball had prevailed in Mann's defamation suit against him. As many of you know, the climate mullah's other defamation suit - against yours truly - is currently in its eighth year in the constipated bowels of the District of Columbia court system. So I was interested to learn the disposition of the Mann vs Ball case, now in its ninth year. Mann had sued Ball for reprising an old joke that the guy belonged in the state pen rather than Penn State. Jessica Alba doesn't diss him like that, and Doctor Fraudpants sees no reason why anyone else should be allowed to.

Well, Mann's suit is now well and truly dead. Unfortunately, the Honourable Mr Justice Giaschi of the British Columbia Supreme Court did not issue a written decision but ruled from the bench - which I always enjoy if I happen to be in the room, but which otherwise means you have to wait until the court stenographer types it all out. Which he or she has now done...........To Read More....

My Take -  First, I'm going to be following up with may own article and some history that's not been talked about very much.  Secondly, I've been following this from the beginning and it shocks me it's taken eight years to get to this point. 

In the Ball suit and the Steyn suit Mann didn't expect to be challenged in what's called a SLAPP suit, which stand for Strategic lawsuit against public participation.  In Canada Ball could have defended himself on the right of "public participation", he instead chose what's called the the Truth Defense, also know in Canada the "scorched earth defense", and now Mann has lost.  He refused to turn over the data the court required, which in Canada is considered an admission of guilt.  He'll have to do it here.  Mann's intimidation tactics failed, so he's kept the legal mill churning hoping the costs will skyrocket out of control, which it has, forcing everyone to walk away.  That's hasn't  happened.  Apparently his legal understanding is as weak as his science.  Suing someone is like riding a tiger.  You can't just get off and say, I was just joking.   

One of the most important points made in this article is this:

For a start, although Mann always presents himself as the victim, it is important to remember that, in this case as in mine, he is the plaintiff: He chose to sue - and without that conscious choice there would be no legal action. So, when Mann says there was no "finding that Ball's allegations were correct", Ball did not allege anything: That is a legal term and the only allegations before the Court were Mann's, in his statement of claim against Ball. Those Mann allegations have been dismissed with prejudice - so, in layman's terms, Mann lost and Ball won.