Steacey would have to pay his own bills. Might be expensive against Steyn. Warman not going up against Macleans I’m still not sure about, although it makes some sense after the big interview they did with him. I doubt the CHRC would act.

Perhaps they’re waiting for the police investigation to wind up.

Funny, I don’t remember the “illegal hacking of internet sites by CHRC investigators” from the hearing. In fact, I don’t remember revelations of CHRC investigators leeching off unsecured wifi access point. I DO remember a Nazi making that post-hoc accusation with no backing evidence as a means to explain how a posting came from an unrelated 3rd party, rather than Warman or the CHRC.

Yes. Shailde is a moron. She is so ideologically blinded and filled with hatred for Warman that she will take the unsubstantiated accusations of a Nazi as fact, because it is convenient to do so. She really needs to check her moral compass.

With libel torts, you pick your victims based upon criteria ranging from how-deep -are-the-pockets to easy-pickings and go. Deep pockets fight back hard at times, though. The National Post folded when Warman sent the notice. There’s deep pockets with an easy win there.

In the end, Warman is probably only after costs and a ruling. For that, he needs only a few defendants.

With the Crookes cases, Crookes did not sue everyone he could.

I don’t think it’s automatically a crime when you end up connected to someone’s unsecured network. Plenty of WiFi devices simply connect to the first available unsecured network, and plenty of WiFi networks are unsecured on purpose.

In any case, Shaidle really is stupid.

There’s a simple enough rule to follow. If it’s not yours and it’s not there explicitly for public use, don’t use it or take it. That works for a $5 bill on the sidework on up to unsecured private wifi points and beyond.

I gather that at least two of the established/admitted facts of record are that “jadewarr” is Dean Steacy’s profile and that the IP address from which “jadewarr” was posting to Stormfront on one day was assigned to a woman with an unsecured wifi point who claims no knowledge of the affair? Has the criminal complaint in that matter against Steacy been resolved? There’s not much point pursuing a civil case with a criminal one in progress.

As a customary practice, people who create or are granted user profiles are responsible for whatever is attributed to that profile. As a matter of principle, all the parties who share a user profile in effect condone whatever the others do with it. If a person doesn’t want to be involved or share in the reputation of whatever is attributed to a profile, he shouldn’t use it.