Consistent Strategy Needed



B

B. Lafferty

Guest
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.
 
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
 
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
 
"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.
 
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.
>
>
 
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.
 
"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.
> >
> >
 
"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.