He's just bitter because he thinks he's owed a few quid from Crusaders. He was stealing a wage anyway.

O'Hara might have a grudge against Harris, but dont put it on twitter. What he said about MK is, in this country at least probably illeagal. MK should drop a large defamation claim on him ASAP

I'm not sure how twitter works in these cases.



Twitter is a USA based company. So probably legal under free speech laws over there.

The perpatrator is in France. Not sure but in France the laws could be different to UK but defamation is still illegal.

Victim is in the UK.



So were would Koukash lay the court proceedings???



Also he may just take the higher road and ignore the little worm as he is not worth his time of day. He's a business man so probably can do without the hassle of taking on everyone who makes comments about him, but then there is the principle that the worms comments are beyond the pale, so at least taking him to court would mean O'Hara learns it's costly to accuse someone of links to terrorism with nothing more than skin colouration to go on.



I do think Koukash brings an element of the unknown to the game but in terms of actual actions Koukash has done nothing to deserve this kind of abuse.

I'm no expert, but surely "freedom of speech" doesn't go so far as to make it alright to publically label someone a terrorist?

I'm also sure people have been prosecuted here for things they've posted on Twitter despite it being a US firm for things like racist comments. Though that's criminal prosecutions (ie racist) rather than civil matters (defamation) but from my very limited knowledge of such things I think Koukash could decide to sue O'Hara in either Britain or France and maybe the US.



Personally, if he doesn't receive a grovelling apology from O'Hara, I think he should try the criminal route for the racist nature of the comments. If that doesn't work then sue him for everything he's got, including what Crusaders owed him.



I have no sympathy whatsoever with pieces of sh|t like O'Hara. The more people like him removed from RL the better.

Although the comments are posted from France the comment can be read here in the UK so he has been defamed in this country and can take court proceedings here if he wishes.

This.



Same reason Russian oligarchs can sue each other here in the UK, where defamation cases are much quicker to process and easier to bring than back home.



You can bring proceedings in any country in which you can show you have been defamed - basically pretty much anywhere the comments could have been read.

So with it being a world wide forum, he could literally be sued separately in every country in the world?

[url=http://www.clydeco.com/insight/updates/view/defamation-and-social-media-in-the-uaeDubai Maybe Worth A Try[/url

I suspect he is too busy ripping up Hocks contract to worry about being called names.

I doubt it.



They stood by him when he received a 7 game ban for knocking down an official, I'm sure they won't do anything for "only" a 6 game ban.....

Does Hock now hold the title as the most banned player ever, even just for on-field disciplinary reasons.

Since 2011 hock has accumulated:

6 matches (3 for each offence) - use of the knees.

7 matches - deliberate contact with match referee.

4 matches - deliberate contact with match referee.

1 match - abusive language to match official.

2 matches - punching.

4 matches - gouging.

1 match - punching.

So 25 games of suspension (and I can only find records since 2011 on the RFL site). Can anyone come anywhere close?