Consistent Strategy Needed

[B. Lafferty]

From CyclingNews today quoting Armstrong's french lawyer:
"I'm very upset and I don't share the opinion of the court,"
he told AFP, adding that he and Armstrong were not seeking
the suppression of the book, rather a chance to provide the
statement to readers asserting Armstrong's denial of the
most serious charges.

From Armstrong's London solicitors:

Accordingly, Lance Armstrong has instructed his lawyers to
immediately institute libel proceedings

1) In the High Court in London against the Sunday Times and
David Walsh seeking an injunction and substantial damages
2) In Paris, against David Walsh, Pierre Ballester, the
publishers of 'LA Confidential' and the publishers of
L'Express.

Proceedings will be filed in the High Court tomorrow. Issued
by Schillings, Royalty House

So in France Armstrong doesn't want the book suppressed but
in the UK he does. Perhaps this is really an attempt by
Armstrong to raise the shophistication level of English
speaking Lance Tifosi.

 

[Jon Fiedler]

B. Lafferty wrote:

> So in France Armstrong doesn't want the book suppressed
> but in the UK he does. Perhaps this is really an attempt
> by Armstrong to raise the shophistication level of English
> speaking Lance Tifosi.
>
>

My guess (and I'm no lawyer) is that the differences in the
legal systems make suppressing publication in France much
more difficult.

As an aside, to all the people comparing these proceedings
to what they know of US law, you shouldn't. France is under
the Napoleonic code, which is significantly different. The
British courts are similar to the US, but there are still
important differences (I'm not positive truth is an absolute
defense in libel in England (I know it's not in Australia,
and I would expect those two countries to be aligned)).

jon

 

[Davey Crockett]

Jon Fiedler <[email protected]> writes:

> B. Lafferty wrote:
>
> > So in France Armstrong doesn't want the book suppressed
> > but in the UK he does. Perhaps this is really an attempt
> > by Armstrong to raise the shophistication level of
> > English speaking Lance Tifosi.
> >
>
> My guess (and I'm no lawyer) is that the differences in
> the legal systems make suppressing publication in France
> much more difficult.
>
> As an aside, to all the people comparing these proceedings
> to what they know of US law, you shouldn't. France is
> under the Napoleonic code, which is significantly
> different. The British courts are similar to the US, but
> there are still important differences (I'm not positive
> truth is an absolute defense in libel in England (I know
> it's not in Australia, and I would expect those two
> countries to be aligned)).
>
> jon

http://www.hfac.uh.edu/comm/media_libel/libel/other.html

--
le Vent a Dos Davey Crockett No e-patents, pas de brevets
logiciels Pétition contre les brevets logiciels :
http://petition.eurolinux.org Six-Day site:
http://members.rogers.com/sixday/sixday.html Please address
all replies to the list

 

[Jonathan V.D. S]

"Jon Fiedler" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...
> B. Lafferty wrote:
>
> > So in France Armstrong doesn't want the book suppressed
> > but in the UK he does. Perhaps this is really an attempt
> > by Armstrong to raise the shophistication level of
> > English speaking Lance Tifosi.
> >
> >
>
> My guess (and I'm no lawyer) is that the differences in
> the legal systems make suppressing publication in France
> much more difficult.

Why doesn't he say he wants to suppress the book in France,
but doesn't have the ability to do so? At least he would
give the impression of being honest.

Jonathan.

 

[L G]

Why doesn't LA take a lie detector test?

"Jonathan v.d. Sluis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Jon Fiedler" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
> news:[email protected]...
> > B. Lafferty wrote:
> >
> > > So in France Armstrong doesn't want the book
> > > suppressed but in the UK
he
> > > does. Perhaps this is really an attempt by Armstrong
> > > to raise the shophistication level of English speaking
> > > Lance Tifosi.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > My guess (and I'm no lawyer) is that the differences in
> > the legal systems make suppressing publication in France
> > much more difficult.
>
> Why doesn't he say he wants to suppress the book in
> France, but doesn't
have
> the ability to do so? At least he would give the
> impression of being
honest.
>
> Jonathan.

 

[Tom Kunich]

Davey Crockett <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<87r7s81l0q.fsf@cpe000423176ea9-cm0f2069983361.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com>...
> Jon Fiedler <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > B. Lafferty wrote:
> >
> > > So in France Armstrong doesn't want the book
> > > suppressed but in the UK he does. Perhaps this is
> > > really an attempt by Armstrong to raise the
> > > shophistication level of English speaking Lance
> > > Tifosi.
> > >
> >
> > My guess (and I'm no lawyer) is that the differences in
> > the legal systems make suppressing publication in France
> > much more difficult.
> >
> > As an aside, to all the people comparing these
> > proceedings to what they know of US law, you shouldn't.
> > France is under the Napoleonic code, which is
> > significantly different. The British courts are similar
> > to the US, but there are still important differences
> > (I'm not positive truth is an absolute defense in libel
> > in England (I know it's not in Australia, and I would
> > expect those two countries to be aligned)).
> >
> > jon
>
> http://www.hfac.uh.edu/comm/media_libel/libel/other.html

As Davey points out "Truth is a complete defense" in
Australian and English law.

 

[K. J. Papai]

"L G" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Why doesn't LA take a lie detector test?

Exactly -- every pro needs to pass a Lie "Detetector" test
and then 30 drug tests a year to prove their innocence.

You're brilliant? Where does your genius come from
from Rolfie?

> "Jonathan v.d. Sluis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Jon Fiedler" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > B. Lafferty wrote:
> > >
> > > > So in France Armstrong doesn't want the book
> > > > suppressed but in the UK
> he
> > > > does. Perhaps this is really an attempt by Armstrong
> > > > to raise the shophistication level of English
> > > > speaking Lance Tifosi.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > My guess (and I'm no lawyer) is that the differences
> > > in the legal systems make suppressing publication in
> > > France much more difficult.
> >
> > Why doesn't he say he wants to suppress the book in
> > France, but doesn't
> have
> > the ability to do so? At least he would give the
> > impression of being
> honest.
> >
> > Jonathan.
> >

 

[B. Lafferty]

"K. J. Papai" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "L G" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > Why doesn't LA take a lie detector test?
>
> Exactly -- every pro needs to pass a Lie "Detetector" test
> and then 30 drug tests a year to prove their innocence.
>
> You're brilliant? Where does your genius come from
> from Rolfie?

I suggest we make them all spend the month of December with
Gen. Miller at Gitmo undergoing interrogation by one of the
24 superlative methods approved by Sec. Rummy that do not
(allegedly) violate the Geneva Conventions. If they can't
get a confession, then the rider is cleared through the
following December. No tests will be needed throughout the
year as they will again be tortured/questioned in December.