|
Edited on Mon Jan-10-05 03:45 PM by HuckleB
Armstrong wins "a significant victory" in Sunday Times libel suithttp://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/jan05/jan10news"As reported by the UK's Guardian newspaper, Lance Armstrong has won a "a significant victory" in a libel suit against media magnate Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times of London. On December 17, 2004, Hon. Mr. Justice Eady ruled in the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice in London, England in a libel action brought by Lance Armstrong Vs. Times Newspapers Ltd., David Walsh and Alan English. In his 23 page ruling, Mr. Justice Eady examined the article published in the Sunday Times of London on June 13, 2004, written by Alan English, which reports on Times sportswriter David Walsh's book LA Confidentiel (so far only published in France). English's article on the book, written by Walsh and former L'Equipe cycling reporter Pierre Ballester initially alleged that Armstrong was associated with "illicit performance enhancing drugs", a claim Mr. Justice Eady stated that Times Newspapers Ltd. had "no room of advancing a plea of justification", which finds for the libel of Armstrong in the June 13 article.
Justice Eady initially cited a passage in the Times article, written by Walsh's Sunday Times of London colleague Alan English, that says, "'Armstrong is no ordinary cyclist, but there are those who fear that a man who won five Tours de France in a row must have succumbed to the pressures of taking drugs.' The formula 'those who fear that' is not an effective device to avoid libel."
..." |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
