[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Except that the onus is on the Star to prove its true, and not on Ford to defend himself without seeing the proof.

Without the video in hand that can be shown then the whole story is questionable.

For them to say that Ford has to answer questions, I think his first answer is, go buy the video and show it to me, then I'll answer any questions.

The burden of proof is on the accuser every time.

The Star is a failing paper that's desperate for anything that will save its failing subscription base and falling dollars, the fact that they went whole hog into this without having the video in hands just feels desperate and sleazy, and like I said, Rob Ford is an a$$, but if the Star is going to destroy his career and his life they'd better have way more then, but reporters saw it.

Its not protecting a source anymore, we know from the Gawker who has the video and how much their asking for, the video tape is not something that can be protected by confidentiality rules.

If I was the person with the video I'd double down and raise my price on the video with the caveat that if I don't get the money, I burn it, because without it, the Star and probably Gawkers owners are sued into oblivion.

No kidding. $100k for the video would seem like peanuts if The Star is planning on coming out with higher subscription and advertising targets from all this hoopola. If they don't get the video soon, their hail mary throw is going to doom them into oblivion.