That reminds me of this news item from The Des Moines Register, June 18, 1959, reprinted in Bill Bryson's "The Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid: A Memoir" (p. 106):
A high court jury awarded entertainer Liberace 8,000 pounds ($22,400) damages Wednesday in a libel suit against the London Daily Mirror. The jurors decided after 3½ hours of deliberation that a story in 1956 by Mirror journalist William N. Connor implied that the pianist was a homosexual. Among the phrases Liberace cited in his suit was Connor’s description of him as “everything he, she or it can want.” He also described the entertainer as “fruit-flavored.”
Mga Post
16 (na) komento:
What is there about Res Judicata the Brits don't understand.
How much will all the Birthers get when we finally find out Obama WAS born in Kenya?
Did Connor conduct a taste test?
Yea, I was about to say, what about the judicial infallibility doctrine of res judicata.
It wasn't a settlement, the "newspaper... lost a libel action".
Um... *they finally find out...
As I understand it, truth is not a defense in the UK. That's why libel tourists love it so much.
Well, they're also saying it was a "settlement", maybe to avert an appeal?
But can the British substitute the finding of the "US Anti-Doping Agency" on the issue for one of its own courts of law?
The jurors decided after 3½ hours of deliberation that a story in 1956 by Mirror journalist William N. Connor implied that the pianist [Liberace] was a homosexual.
The British must be slow on the up-take.
Austin Powers: Jimi Hendrix...deceased.
Drugs.
Janis Joplin.
Deceased.
Alcohol.
Mama Cass.
Deceased.
Ham sandwich.
Zugabe: Good morning, Austin.
You know, I sometimes forget you've missed out on the last 30 years. Fall of the Berlin Wall the first female British Prime Minister end of apartheid.
Austin Powers: Yeah, and I can't believe Liberace was gay. I mean, women loved him! I didn't see that one coming, no.
Author Jeffery Archer went to jail over perjury in his successful libel trial
The mother country needs to swallow its pride and finally adopt the free speech principle, and perhaps a few others from our bill of rights.
caseym54: what if he was born here but renounced his citizenship at some point?
Why are the British so concerned about homosexuals? Their population must bulge with them.
What does the law say about this? It seems the paper is still in the wrong, for writing information that wasn't proven. That's wrong, and it makes sense the Times was penalized so it and other newspapers stop the bad behavior.
On the other hand, as it's pretty clear now that he had taken the drugs, it doesn't seem like Armstrong should benefit either.
Also, isn't there any requirement for Armstrong to submit to the judge/jury that he had not taken performance enhancing drugs? Of can one get away with simply saying "You have no proof and it's damaging to me."
Sounds like someone's still got his knickers in a twist over that loss.
Do they really have enough evidence that he was using these drugs back in 2006? Does it matter? It would be hilarious if they lost this second lawsuit, too.
Wait a minute, are you suggesting that Liberace was gay?
British libel law makes British newspapers do strange things. For example they can't say somebody was arrested and is being interrogated. It comes out something like "Mr Ripper is assisting police with their enquiries." Or if, say, a Member of Parliament makes a statement while obviously very drunk, they say "The Member from East Woodshed appeared tired."
Mag-post ng isang Komento
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.