Criminal Justice Question

criminal justice discussion question and need an explanation and answer to help me learn.

This is a case law assignment please read the full case that has mentioned in the question sheet and answer according to the numbers shown next to the question.
Requirements: | .doc file
This is a case law assignment please read the full case that has mentioned in the question sheet and answer according to the numbers shown next to the question.
1. When reading the case, note the relevant question numbers in the margins of the case for easy reference when you come to write your answers.
2. Make sure you understand the case and the questions before attempting to answer them.
3. Pay particular attention to the number of marks awarded for each question. If the marks awarded seem excessive given what you think is the answer, then it is likely you have missed something. Go back and rethink your answer and answer fully. Conversely, do not devote too much space to questions which are only for a few marks.
4. Reason your answers fully and clearly. Make sure that your reasoning follows step by step. Do not assume that the marker will understand what you are referring to: spell out your reasoning.
5. Try to use your own words as far as possible in order to show that you understand the issue. Often what judges say is cryptic and assumes that you are on the same wavelength as them. By using your own words and bringing out the implicit chains of reasoning in the judgement, you will convince the examiner that you understand the issues involved and the reasoning used.
6. Last year’s Exercise, plus model answer, may be viewed from the class website on Myplace and should be looked at (and indeed attempted) before you draft your answers to this year’s exercise.
Your overall answer should not exceed 2500 words. You must provide a word count for your submission and you will be penalised for work over the maximum word length. Submissions without word counts will receive a mark of zero.  The number in brackets after the question indicates how much that question is worth and hence how much space you should devote to answering that question.
 
The Exercise
Read the case of Campbell v Dugdale 2019 SLT (Sh Ct) 89 (Sheriff McGowan, 17th August 2018) and answer the following questions.
[NB: “Proof before answer”.  A “proof” is a civil trial of the evidence (“trial”, in Scotland, being a term only applicable to criminal cases).  Permitting a “proof before answer” means, “we should hear the evidence before making a final ruling on the law”, or “this is an arguable case”.  This outcome is particularly appropriate to cases that will turn on their own facts.  Campbell v Dugdale is a perfect example – a judge can only answer the question “is this statement defamatory?” after hearing evidence of what was actually said, and the context in which the statement was made.]
[NNB: This case generated much comment in the press and social media.  Avoid that comment.  In order to give answers that are legally authoritative you must rely on legal sources – the case law, commentary in legal journals etc.]
(1)   What were the legally relevant facts of this case? (10 marks)
(2)   What was the legal dispute that Sheriff McGowan had to resolve? (20 marks)
(3)   How did the parties argue in relation to “fair comment”? (25 marks)
(4)   How did Sheriff McGowan resolve the “fair comment” argument? (10 marks)
(5)   What use was made of  Joseph v Spiller [2010] UKSC 53; [2011] 1 A.C. 852 by the parties, and by the sheriff? (15 marks)
(6)   What use did the sheriff put to the literature to which he referred?  (5 marks)
(7)   Was Campbell awarded damages against Dugdale?  Provide authority for your answer. (You will need to trace the subsequent proceedings in this case to answer this). (15 marks)