In its pre-constitutionalized form (pre-1964), libel was strict liability. That means liability without fault if you publish something false and defamatory, no matter how reasonable you were in your belief. Is that really what the OP wants? So if Kerry wants to sue you for challenging his heroic credentials, you have to try to outspend John Kerry to prove that he is the pusillanimous fraud that he is. Sounds like people who want to keep their homes won’t get into a fight with John Kerry. Is that really what you want? It would certainly deter me from expressing my well-grounded views concerning John Kerry’s credentials as a war hero. Liability without fault is the law in the UK and the vast majority of countries, and it’s one of the reasons why rich people get away with even more there than they do here.
