Talk:Sarah Tisdall

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Law Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article has been assessed as Low-importance on the assessment scale.

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

[edit] Gigantic sentence

Although initially the case against the paper was deemed to be covered by section 10 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, the judgement was almost immediately overturned on appeal, on the grounds that although the document itself was harmless, a civil servant capable of leaking it might leak others which were not. This really needs to be cleaned up! It doesn't explain what case was brought initially by the Crown, what happened to that case? was there another case? what happened? The sequence is muddled into one gigantic sentence. --Red King 23:33, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Now revamped into bite-sized portions!Phase4 19:15, 16 June 2006 (UTC)