It can be, but an apology is generally related to the damage done. It has to be determined whether the damage is alleviated by the apology. Sometimes, the plaintiff tries to obtain a court ruling confirming that what was said was false. But often the problem is that we are talking about comments made about the facts. The Stoffer case, though, is just a question of facts. The member apologized. But in this case, it is perhaps more a question of comments than facts. Is the comment justified under the circumstances? Does it affect the member's moral character to the point where he cannot face his constituents or his colleagues in the House or in committee? Is it a moral insult?
