The judge says he was not a paedophile.

You are correct he was held on remand - that means he had not been proved guilty of anything. You said he was sentenced to prison - he wasn't.

That is what the newspaper reports of the day say. You told people to read them.

I did.

I am not defending him, I am pointing out that what you wrote is libellous and that under the laws of this country, not only you but by publishing it Mudcat is equally guilty.

That's all.