Road Cycling · Public discussion

French Judge Whacks Armstrong

Started by B. Lafferty · · Last activity · 5 posts · 481 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Road Cycling
Published
21 June 2004
Last activity
21 June 2004
Original author
B. Lafferty
Posts
5
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
481
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–5 of 5
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. [censored] only goes so far:

    Livre accusant Armstrong de dopage: le juge rejette la
    demande d'encart lun 21 jui, 3:13 PM

    PARIS (AFP) - Le juge des référés a rejeté, lundi à Paris,
    une demande du coureur cycliste américain Lance Armstrong
    d'insérer un encart niant les accusations de dopage portées
    contre lui dans un livre paru la semaine dernière.

    L'avocat de l'éditeur (La Martinière) et des auteurs de "LA.
    Confidentiel, les secrets de Lance Armstrong" s'est déclaré
    "très satisfait" par la décision du juge. Il a notamment
    souligné que le coureur avait été condamné à verser aux
    défendeurs un euro (1,21 dollar) à titre de dommages et
    intérêts "pour procédure abusive".

    "Le juge a parfaitement compris en condamnant M. Armstrong
    pour procédure abusive que l'intéressé avait tenté de
    répondre par la voie judiciaire à des questions des
    journalistes auxquelles il a refusé de répondre", a
    déclaré Me Arnault de Montbrial. Lors de l'audience,
    vendredi dernier, les avocats de Lance Armstrong avaient
    dénoncé un "livre à scandale" qui porte atteinte à
    l'honneur du coureur.

    Le livre est paru mardi derni

  2. B. Lafferty said:

    [censored] only goes so far:


    As Cardinal Synne said to BishoP rick ``Well back in the
    good old Medieval Days when we had two Chief WitchDoktors,
    we were lucky 'cause although we got twice as much Papal
    Bull, we didn't have Iconoclastic [censored] writing books
    about our national Heros.''

    ''But looking on the bright side, maybe we can sell that
    Armstrong a few Papal Indulgences or a Dispensation to marry
    that Magdalene he's consorting with.''

    ''Amen to that,'' said BishoP rick, "Qui sine peccatum est
    vestrum and all that''

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

  3. B. Lafferty <[email hidden]> wrote:

    Book accusing LA of doping: judge rejects the request
    for an insert

    PARIS: the judge in referee (I don't know what that means)
    rejected, Monday in Paris, a request from the cyclist LA to
    insert denying the doping accusations leveled against him in
    a book published last week.

    The lawyer for the editor (La Martiniere) and the authors
    of "LA Confidential, the secrets of LA" said he was
    feeling "very happy" about the decision from the judge.
    In particular, he pointed out that the cyclist had to pay
    the defense the amount of 1 Euro for "Abuse of the
    judicial process".

    "The judge understood perfectly, by fining LA for abuse of
    process, that he tried to answer judicially to questions
    from journalists he had refused to answer", declared Arnault
    de Montbrial. During the audience/trial on Friday, the
    lawyers of LA had denounced that "scandalous book" which
    tainted the honor of the racer.

    The book was published on Tuesday last week.

    Didier

    --
    Didier A Depireux [email hidden]
    [email hidden] 20 Penn Str - S218E
    neurobiology.umaryland.edudepireux.htm Anatomy
    and Neurobiology Phone: 410-706-1272 (lab) University
    of Maryland -1273 (off) Baltimore MD 21201 USA Fax:
    1-410-706-2512

  4. Didier A. Depireux said:

    fining LA for abuse of process

    Just spoke to my wife (who is a French judge btw) and she
    says this is most unusual and told me this:

    The president of the court (federal district court level)
    said Armstrong should have issued two different procedings.

    i. an urgent proceding asking for the injunction
    (which he did)
    ii. a defamation proceding setting out in greater detail on
    which grounds he was sustaining loss

    In the first procedings he wanted a note put in the book
    saying he had issued the defamation proceedings, which
    was not true.

    Basically his lawyer seems to have made a bit of a poo.

  5. David Off said:

    Basically his lawyer seems to have made a bit of a poo.

    From what I hear, part of the problem was that LANCE hired
    an asswipe that only showed him documents in French and
    refused to translate them into English.

    Bob Schwartz [email hidden]

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.