On 14/07/06, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
According to his fan-club, that would violate the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. That is the entire basis of their legal threats, that the disclosure of the conviction is motivated by malice and is therefore proscribed. This is, of course, complete bollocks in as much as I would not know Lauder-Frost from a hole in the ground, and the editor who did most of the work on the conviction, including paying for a Lexis-Nexis search, is not even British.
It may be in English wikipedians best interests to not contribute to the article if there's any doubt about the legal implications. I am sure we can find non-British editors willing to deal with it.
British courts have shown an unfortunate willingness to ignore the nationality of defendants in Internet defamation cases, incidentally. I wouldn't be so quick to prescribe this.