THE SUNDAY TIMES is suing Lance Armstrong for over €1.2 million over a libel payment made to the disgraced cyclist in 2006.
The newspaper paid Armstrong €400,000 to settle a libel case after previously suggesting that he may have cheated.
But the United States Anti-Doping Agency subsequently found that he had led the ‘most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen’.
USADA’s findings lead to a life ban for the Texan, who was also stripped of his seven Tour de France wins.
The newspaper is reportedly demanding the return of the original settlement payment, along with interest and legal costs.
In a letter to Armstrong’s lawyers, the paper said: “It is clear that the proceedings were baseless and fraudulent.
Your representations that you had never taken performance-enhancing drugs were deliberately false.”
The newspaper had long questioned Armstrong’s achievements and in 2004 it published an article stating that it was appropriate for questions about his success to be “posed and answered”.
After Armstrong’s lawyers issued a writ, the newspaper settled with him in June 2006.
Lance will come out with a full confession on Oprah or some such show in the next few years especially when the money runs low. It’s guaranteed.
Oprah show is finished, just saying like…
Well then they shouldn’t have settled the case should they? Idiots.
Your a clown robin
@ Willie – “You’re”
Big star for you!
Thanks Pauric, now both of us have silly comments posted. Congratulations.
Willie, with your well constructed counter-argument and faultless grammar, you demonstrate your own clown-ness remarkably well. Not.
Pauric, I’m pretty sure the ‘g’ in “Mcgowan” ought to be capitalised.
Here’s my point. The Sunday Times either alleged Armstrong was a cheat or they didn’t. If they didn’t, they shouldn’t have settled out of court as that would make them idiots. If they did allege he was a cheat, they should have had jolly good reason to. If they didn’t have good reason, then they’re idiots. If they had good reason to call Armstrong a cheat and settled out of court, then they’re idiots.
Now, if the court had awarded a settlement against The Sunday Times, they’d have a case for redress. But they voluntarily made a settlement. So they don’t. Idiots.
Needle Dopestrong has put a question mark over every pro cyclist. I hope they get their money – even the Murdoch Evil Empire can be on the good side.
I bought his book just before he was exposed :p
Money back?
Secondhand for charity so not so bad :)
Needle Pharmstrong might be better. Hope they win. I wish I could edit my comment.
Wish I could delete all your comments!!
You must be a fan of the cheat. Pharmstrong is good.
When he wins this (and he will because theres an actual burden of proof in a court of law and hearsay is inadmissible) it will set a legal precedent for him to take a huge liable case against the USADA…
Nonsense. You’re transfusing two completely different issues.
Liable? I think you mean libel?
I hope they both lose.
They are both parasites crooks and liars.
You’d better have something to back up calling someone a crook. It’s libel.
They’d probably settle though.
Good one Emily!
That the has fans in spite of piles of evidence is interesting. Pharmstrong is Jesus to some.