LA Denied In Paris

(Richard Adams) said:

edition.cnn.comcycling.armstrOpen ↗
ong.reut/

So LA has lost round one.

Assuming that French Law is similar to most American
jurisdictions, for LA to have obtained an injunction
preventing the publication of the book would have been
pretty much impossible. Accordingly, his lawyers came up
the alternative idea of having the Court require
attaching his denials of the doping claims as an insert
in the book. Practically speaking, that would have
stalled publication or killed it, or at least blunted its
impact. Prior to the hearing, this idea charitably could
have been described as "novel." The judge, however,
apparently that it was more of the "frivolous"variety,
and threw it out summarily with a fine.

Still to come is the actual libel lawsuit which has yet to
be filed. When and if it is filed and tried, it will test
who ultimately is telling the "truth" on the question
whether or not LA used performance enhancing drugs, as he
denies and his accusers allege.

In favor of LA is the fact he has never tested positive or
refused a test. Also the distinct possibility that the book
authors are just a bunch of greedy sleazy tabloid
journalists in it for the bucks.

Against LA is the testimony of former US Postal Team
employees, the Lemonds, etc. Also the distinct possibility
that LA is just another among many professional endurance
athletes who commonly gobble, drink or inject anything and
everything possible, legal or not, to maintain their
competitive edge.

So we'll see whether LA is hero or scumball druggie, or
whether the book authors are the Woodward & Bernstein of
professional cycling or are themselves the scumballs.

--dt

"Doug Taylor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

(Richard Adams) said:

edition.cnn.comcycling.armstronOpen ↗
g.reut/

So LA has lost round one.

Assuming that French Law is similar to most American
jurisdictions, for LA to have obtained an injunction
preventing the publication of the book would have been
pretty much impossible. Accordingly, his lawyers came up
the alternative idea of having the Court require
attaching his denials of the doping claims as an insert
in the book. Practically speaking, that would have
stalled publication or killed it, or at least blunted its
impact. Prior to the hearing, this idea charitably could
have been described as "novel." The judge, however,
apparently that it was more of the "frivolous"variety,
and threw it out summarily with a fine.

In US and, to my knowledge, UK jusriprudence, to obtain an
preliminary injunction ,one must show the court that the
interested party will suffer irreperable harm if the
injunction is not issued and that the interested party is
likely to prevail on the merits at trial. Not an easy task.

Quoted message said:

Still to come is the actual libel lawsuit which has yet to
be filed. When and if it is filed and tried, it will test
who ultimately is telling the "truth" on the question
whether or not LA used performance enhancing drugs, as he
denies and his accusers allege.

Truth; what a lovely concept. More likely, it will provide
us with a winner and loser in the court. It will also
provide great entertainment value, particularly when
Armstrong, Johan and friends are called to testify. I can't
wait to read Kathy Lemond's testimony on cross.

Quoted message said:

In favor of LA is the fact he has never tested positive or
refused a test. Also the distinct possibility that the
book authors are just a bunch of greedy sleazy tabloid
journalists in it for the bucks.

Means nothing to not have tested positive. Ask the Spotted
[censored]. The journalistic credentials of Walsh and B are well
established. Hacks they aren't.

Quoted message said:

Against LA is the testimony of former US Postal Team
employees, the Lemonds, etc. Also the distinct possibility
that LA is just another among many professional endurance
athletes who commonly gobble, drink or inject anything and
everything possible, legal or not, to maintain their
competitive edge.

You really think that's a possibility???!!!

Quoted message said:

So we'll see whether LA is hero or scumball druggie, or
whether the book authors are the Woodward & Bernstein of
professional cycling or are themselves the scumballs.

Maybe. I predict that Armstrong drops the matter by the end
of the year if it hasn't already been dismissed.

Doug Taylor said:

(Richard Adams) said:

edition.cnn.comcycling.armstroOpen ↗
ng.reut/

So LA has lost round one.

Prior to the hearing, this idea charitably could have been
described as "novel."

Not that novel, recently Bertrand Cantat (a French singer)
tried to stop publication of a book (Ma Fille, Marie) which
describes him as an murderer. The tribnal de grand instance
in Paris also through this claim out.

Quoted message said:

The judge, however, apparently that it was more of
the "frivolous"variety, and threw it out summarily
with a fine.

See my other post. Basically he wanted an insert in the book
to say he was suing the authors for defamation but as the
Judge observed, his lawyer had failed to file a defamation
suit before the French courts.

David Off said:

See my other post. Basically he wanted an insert in the
book to say he was suing the authors for defamation but as
the Judge observed, his lawyer had failed to file a
defamation suit before the French courts.

So a couple of years ago my wife was asked by a French
academic journal to review a just-published (French) book in
her field of expertise. She thought parts of the book were
really quite well-written, especially the part that was
copied word-for-word from an article she'd published a few
years before. Here's the kicker: the author is a professor
with the (alleged) reputation for appropriating his
students' work as his own. In this case he took credit for
writing something that he (allegedly) took from his student,
not knowing that his student (allegedly) took it from an
article written by my (alleged) wife.

The book was already published and in the bookstores.

I wanted my wife to do two things:

1. Finish writing the book review she'd been asked to do.
2. Get an insert put into all unsold copies of the book. You
know those lines that appear near the front matter of
books that say something like,

permission of the publisher?" I wanted them to glue in a
little notice

without the permission of the author." It turns out this
wasn't possible: my wife doesn't hold the copyright to her
article. The journal where she published it does. She was
advised that if she had filed a suit to get the insert put
into the books, there was a good chance that her case would
be tossed.

I guess there was third thing I wanted my wife to do:

3. String this guy up by the balls. A side effect of the
move toward digital piano? It's much harder to find piano
wire nowadays.

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 08:48:40 +0200, "Robert Chung" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

In this case he took credit for writing something that he
(allegedly) took from his student, not knowing that his
student (allegedly) took it from an article written by my
(alleged) wife.

I think your last [alleged] is in the wrong place. I could
be wrong, but if it IS in the right place, checking your
marriage certificate should clear it up.

Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on
two wheels...

In article <[email hidden]>, Curtis L.

Russell said:

Robert Chung said:

In this case he took credit for writing something that he
(allegedly) took from his student, not knowing that his
student (allegedly) took it from an article written by my
(alleged) wife.

I think your last [alleged] is in the wrong place. I could
be wrong, but if it IS in the right place, checking your
marriage certificate should clear it up.

Or maybe there is some truth in the Times article about
l'affaire Chung.

-WG

Curtis L. Russell said:

Robert Chung said:

In this case he took credit for writing something that he
(allegedly) took from his student, not knowing that his
student (allegedly) took it from an article written by my
(alleged) wife.

I think your last [alleged] is in the wrong place. I could
be wrong, but if it IS in the right place, checking your
marriage certificate should clear it up.

Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two
wheels...

it could be that by writing "(alleged) wife" he intended to
clarify his previous to uses of the word. h

h squared said:

to uses

two uses, not to uses. h