meb

Likewise, tort is not my specialty-having worked 13 years as an engineer before entering law school-I naturally went toward patent law. My tort cobwebs from law school/bar exams are under a decade old and but for the omission of the reckless disregard of truth as an alternate malice element I concur with your US analysis.

The malice element is present in public persons with the burden of proof on the plaintiff per NYTimes vs. Sullivan. Under US defamation laws, Simeoni would probably qualify as a public person under at least a Gertz public person threshold. The malice standard didn’t exist under traditional common law, but came about as a Supreme Court balance of defamation vs. the publics interest in free debate under our first amendment to the Constitution. Given the derivation, I suspect the malice standard might be unique to the US, although it is possible the Court adapted it from other countries without expressly citing foreign law as a practical implementation of our first amendment objects.

Malice is not limited to intent to injure the other party-it also includes a reckless disregard of the truth- i.e., didn’t attempt to corroborate the validity of the assertion.

If a malice element exists under Italian law it doesn’t appear stage 18 helped Lance’s case-even though it occurred after the alleged defamation.

Timo

It seems Lance now has an even bigger problem with the Italian prosecutors because (excuse me if my English isn't that good) they consider his actions during the final Tour de France stages as being "intimidation of a witness".

bac

He intimidated everyone in the field this year!

Timo

...yes, but not everybody was intimidated in the way Simeoni was dealt with and the others are no witness in an investigation by Italian prosecutors.

ChipRGW

Lance had some comments about this in last nights LA Interview on OLN.
He claims he did not call Simeoni a "liar". He did say that Simeoni was not telling the truth in regards to his claims that "Everyone BUT him is on drugs". Makes sense to me.
Also makes sense as to why the whole peleton might be irritated at this guy.

Timo

IS the whole peloton irritated at this guy???

ChipRGW

I doubt it's everyone. But Lance seems convinced that there was a LOT of animosity directed towards him (simeoni) from many of the other riders.

roadie gal

Forgive my ignorance, but I still don't understand why it was such a big deal that Lance ran down his breakaway.

DogBoy

I'm no expert, but I believe its a big deal because it was purely vindictive. The guy was no threat to Lance's position, and yet he targeted him specifically. In other words, the REASON he chased him down is because he didn't like him. After he caught him, he essentially said to other riders, I don't care if you break, but if this guy goes with you, we're going to chase you down. So its fine if other riders that are no threat to him go, but not this guy.

I still don't think that amounts to intimidating a witness, but it does leave a bit of a sour taste in my mouth. I just don't think its very sporting to attack a guy who is no threat to you just because you don't want to see him win anything. Again, I think Lance is free to do what he wants, but it would have been more in character (at least the character he wants portraied) if he had just left him alone.

roadie gal

Thanks. Now I understand.

Ajay213

Lance has never been the "shy guy", if he doesn't like you or something he'll let his opinion be known.

If Simeoni really does act that high and mighty about being clean, insinuating that he's the only clean cyclist in the pack, then I have to give Lance credit for doing what he did. I've never read any full/trustworthy quotes from the guy, so I have no idea if that's really his attitude or not, I did see his "walking the bike" across the line spectacle and it was more than a little over the top.

However if Simeoni isn't saying the above then I think Lance was being a bit of a bully.

Andrew