I sometimes write to authors about their books. After reading Kleptopia and then about the libel case over the book I thought of past posts I had put up on libel cases involving historic events. I wrote to the author, Tom Burgis. That letter forms this post. To date I have not received a reply. Should he respond and be willing I will put up has response.
****
Dear Tom -
I am a lawyer and blogger living in Western Canada.
Most of my blog posts concern crime fiction. Some are about non-fiction. Each year my sons search for a couple of books, usually non-fiction, for Christmas presents to me.
Last Christmas my books included Kleptopia though it took the boys a few months to get me the books. I am very glad they included Kleptopia in their choices. It is excellent. A link to my review is below.
As I read the book I thought you were going to be irritating, more likely angering, some very wealthy and powerful men. It was little surprise when I reached the afterword to read court proceedings had been launched against you.
I was glad to see that you and HarperCollins prevailed in the English libel suit filed by ENRC. A link to my post discussing the judgment is below.
Over the last 30 years I have thought often about how libel cases have dealt with what happened in historic events.
In 2002, after reading The Holocaust on Trial by D.D. Gutenplan, I wrote to the author about his well written book on the libel trial in which David Irving had sued Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher, Penguin Books, over the book, Denying the Holocaust. The defendants convincingly proved in Court the Holocaust took place.
I included the letter in a post, a link is below, I put up in early 2021. In the letter to Gutenplan I discussed ostensibly personal libel cases from England, Canada, Germany and Israel that were actually about history.
I was prompted to post my letter by the court actions undertaken in America by Dominion Voting defending its reputation against Sidney Powell, Rudolph Giuiliani and others who asserted its voting machines of Dominion Voting had caused election fraud. Should the defendants be unwise enough to proceed to trial I believe a U.S. Federal Court will find the allegations against Dominion Voting were false. I include a link below to that post.
As a lawyer I have been directly involved in Federal Commissions of Inquiry seeking the truth about historic events. The first was a national inquiry into the Canadian Blood System over the thousands of Canadians who contracted AIDS and/or Hepatitis C in the 1980’s from transfused blood or blood products. The second was with regard to fraud over 100 years against local Saskatchewan Indian bands. Thousands of acres of land were taken. I also attach a link to that post.
While your case did not reach trial for the good reasons set out by Mr. Justice Nicklen, I thought the case still contributed to the historic record of the actions of “the Trio” and ENRC. The deliberate decision of ENRC to not pursue a libel action, over allegations of corruption for which damages could be sought, effectively vindicates the statements in your book.
I have a few inquiries for you.
Have you read libel cases such as those mentioned in this letter to get a sense of what and how you should write about such topics as the flow of “dirty money” in Kleptopia?
It is clear to me from the book that you have a keen understanding of libel law.
Am I correct that you write with the expectation that you will have to be able to prove in a court the facts stated in your work?
I have not seen any articles or books on libel cases and commissions of inquiry establishing what happened in historic events. What are your thoughts on the role of libel cases and commissions of inquiry in determining history?
I have been involved in some libel cases in Canada and have been struck by the challenge most plaintiffs face in proving damage to their reputations and actual financial consequences from the libel. In reading your case I wondered how ENRC would ever demonstrate they suffered financial loss because of your book. I thought of the work of fiction QB VII by Leon Uris in which an English jury awarded a single half-penny, the smallest amount they could award, to a doctor defamed over his work in a Nazi concentration camp. If the number is available what amount did ENRC claim in their defamation action?
I can understand the Trio not taking personal action in which they could expect to be directly questioned. Those unaccustomed to having their actions probed can find the witness stand very uncomfortable. Adolph Hitler fared badly when cross-examined by German lawyer Hans Litten in 1932. (A final link below is my post on Crossing Hitler by Benjamin Carter Hett).
I will be posting this letter in a few days. If you are willing to reply and to have your response posted I will include it in that post or a separate post.
I look forward to reading more of your work.
All the best.
Bill Selnes
****
Burgis, Tom - (2022) - Kleptopia and ENRC v. Burgis Over Kleptopia
Court Cases to Determine the Truth About Historical Events
Dominion Voting v. Powell - Defamation Action to Set History
Commissions of Inquiry Determining History
Actual Cross Examination of Hitler
You've got such an interesting discussion here about libel, Bill. My guess is that journalists and other non-fiction authors have to consider those questions when they write, and ensure that their work will hold up under scrutiny. Fiction writers do, too, of course, but in a different way. As I read your letter, it occurred to me that a libel lawsuit can be an effective way to try to block some information coming out, so it doesn't surprise me that people try to use that tactic. Very interesting things to think about, for which thanks, and I look forward to reading Tom Burgis' response if you get one.
ReplyDeleteMargot: Thanks for the comment. Everyone is responsible for what they write and say. In recent years I think too many writers and broadcasters have not thought enough before they publish or broadcast. Libel chill is real. At the same time there must be a balance between freedom of speech and defamation. If it is difficult to find the line with regard to particular comments I would say they are not defamatory.
Delete