Appearances Can Be Deceiving, Assignment 01
Appearances Can Be Deceiving, Assignment 11
David Beckham's $25m claim for libel and slander rejected by US judge
In this case with David Beckham's $25m claim for libel and slander of a celebrity magazine that alleged he slept with a prostitute, Irma Nici age 26. US judge rejected his claim, the libel laws in the US are more favourable to defendants. In this case, public figures where they attempt to bring a libel action in the US must be proved "actual malice". The judge states that David Beckham is a public figure and his laywers did not succeed to produce enough evidence that In Touch acted with malice. In addition, of infidelity by Beckham would be of interest to the public. Beckham's lawyer said David was visiting his sick father in Englamd at the time.
Kendall asked the judge to allow the case to proceed but refused. The lawyer of In Touch's owner, Elizabeth McNamara insisted that the company did everything possible to corroborate details from Nici's interview and McNamara tol the court that Nici was "entirely consistent with Mr. Beckham's reputation as a serial philanderer". The company and lawyer Elizabeth were pleased that the court followed the law and did the correct thing. Beckham said the claims were completely false and that caused distress in his family along with never even meeting the woman named Nici nor ever paid to have an affair with her. Bauer argued that In Touch merely reported where it is believed to be true. Beckham's publicist Jeff Raymond said the company have not provided not a piece of evidence to support the claim is vividly true. Beckham and his lawyers state""We have already won a court ruling in Germany and are awaiting damages. Unfortunately, the US legal system requires us to show that the magazine acted maliciously. Any knowledgeable person knows this story not to be true, and we will continue to fight this in court and the decision will be appealed"
I think that David Beckham shouldn't have to worry about what the
David Beckham's $25m claim for libel and slander rejected by US judge
In this case with David Beckham's $25m claim for libel and slander of a celebrity magazine that alleged he slept with a prostitute, Irma Nici age 26. US judge rejected his claim, the libel laws in the US are more favourable to defendants. In this case, public figures where they attempt to bring a libel action in the US must be proved "actual malice". The judge states that David Beckham is a public figure and his laywers did not succeed to produce enough evidence that In Touch acted with malice. In addition, of infidelity by Beckham would be of interest to the public. Beckham's lawyer said David was visiting his sick father in Englamd at the time.
Kendall asked the judge to allow the case to proceed but refused. The lawyer of In Touch's owner, Elizabeth McNamara insisted that the company did everything possible to corroborate details from Nici's interview and McNamara tol the court that Nici was "entirely consistent with Mr. Beckham's reputation as a serial philanderer". The company and lawyer Elizabeth were pleased that the court followed the law and did the correct thing. Beckham said the claims were completely false and that caused distress in his family along with never even meeting the woman named Nici nor ever paid to have an affair with her. Bauer argued that In Touch merely reported where it is believed to be true. Beckham's publicist Jeff Raymond said the company have not provided not a piece of evidence to support the claim is vividly true. Beckham and his lawyers state""We have already won a court ruling in Germany and are awaiting damages. Unfortunately, the US legal system requires us to show that the magazine acted maliciously. Any knowledgeable person knows this story not to be true, and we will continue to fight this in court and the decision will be appealed"
I think that David Beckham shouldn't have to worry about what the