|
|
Post by duchess1 on May 23, 2012 22:16:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by paca on May 24, 2012 2:54:28 GMT -5
Don't you just love it when they rehash the entire story everytime he sues? And they can't sue those stories as they are only reporting the reason for him sueing....the morons will just never learn. If I remember correctly, all these articles came after the French article, so they were only reporting...Let's see what comes out of it. Besides the reports only stated, what everyone in MC talked about, before it was in the papers.
|
|
|
|
Post by paca on May 24, 2012 3:20:38 GMT -5
btw the call her princess Wittstock  |
|
|
|
Post by mrszinck on May 24, 2012 3:26:51 GMT -5
So true, paca.
Why hasn't Albert sued L'Express? Al the talk about suing. And nothing happens…
Let me guess Albert knows their story is true… ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by paca on May 24, 2012 3:40:07 GMT -5
L'express had several sources. They wouldn't have published without verifying. They are a serious paper. La coste always tried to get at their sources and kept several people providing their stories about being with her. There was the father who claimed she was with his wife going to Paris for a hat fitting and his son has recently repeated that. Then there is the guy who did her press in Australia who claims that Assbert had asked him to have lunch with her that day...and I believe there were a few others, like the one saying she went to special Olympics. L'express never stated the exact date, so I always found it interesting that they provided several different stories and explanations without ever knowing if l'express had indeed the correct date. SO far there is nothing new there. So they are going after those who they think do not have evidence. It might very well be though that l'express will come to their rescue. They can always be called as witnesses....
|
|
|
|
Post by MyAdia on May 24, 2012 5:10:59 GMT -5
So true, paca. Why hasn't Albert sued L'Express? Al the talk about suing. And nothing happens… Let me guess Albert knows their story is true… ;D Albert gave a huge press conference after their fake honeymoon to match their fake wedding to express his outrage at the L'Express article - see this thread: Husband & Wife: Attack Rumors to MC Media. IT was published that they sued L'Express, but that has been almost a year ago and there hasn't been anything published about it. More importantly, L'Express still has the article on their website. Charlene has sued another French magazine over privacy issues (photos of her shopping) and the results have been published, but nothing about the L'Express suit. Methinks that they either dropped it and are being quiet about it or they case is not a slam dunk in their favor as many of the others in French court. Paca is right, Albert and his attorney have ALWAYS been more interested in L'Express's sources - because of the truth of the information. Remember, during the middle of his honeymoon, Albert returned to Monaco to fire his long time aide Jayet. If this latest suit goes like everything else connected to this trashy wedding karma will bite them in the butt and they will end up WORSE than they ever could imagine. |
|
|
|
Post by paca on May 24, 2012 5:21:26 GMT -5
the good part of it that it gets all rehashed and drummed into peoples mind. You just have to be utterly stupid suing in order to give all papers a reason to republish the story. And when you sue a paer like the times, you can be sure it will be rehashed and reported over and over again. Since UK laws are not as strict as French laws, they might just end up losing or the times may just consider to persue to EUrpean court. Caro has lost a few cases there as well and this one is just bound to be lost. NOt mentioning that all serious media will report about it and take it for what it really is: bullying.
|
|
|
|
Post by MyAdia on May 24, 2012 5:35:59 GMT -5
Actually, the suit against the Sunday Times was published months ago. |
|
|
|
Post by countess on May 24, 2012 10:50:52 GMT -5
the good part of it that it gets all rehashed and drummed into peoples mind. You just have to be utterly stupid suing in order to give all papers a reason to republish the story. And when you sue a paer like the times, you can be sure it will be rehashed and reported over and over again. Since UK laws are not as strict as French laws, they might just end up losing or the times may just consider to persue to EUrpean court. Caro has lost a few cases there as well and this one is just bound to be lost. NOt mentioning that all serious media will report about it and take it for what it really is: bullying. ROFL oh i hope this bites them on the butt, and it's so funny because it was starting to die down, i've read articles lately without a mention of the runaway bride, but NOW IT"S all over the papers AGAIN OMG so bad, if i didn't know better i'd swear the flying monkey flunkies were trying to get rid of her  |
|
|
|
Post by hibou on May 24, 2012 14:13:31 GMT -5
I wonder if they are still trying to get at L'Express's sources. Notice the timing of the lawsuit against a London paper just as he is there for the Queen's Jubilee. I'm sure the BRF are not amused. Was he trying for sympathy from them because of the press and Diana? I'm sure they don't want to be reminded either. He's an idiot for doing this now. Rehashing the whole run away bride story again a year later is just dumb PR. The man has surrounded himself with more sycophants than the King's new clothes. By the way, Eringer's blog is down and has been since the Clinton, and Al porn story broke. I wonder if Albert is going to sue for the papers printing that one too? JMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by paca on May 24, 2012 14:28:26 GMT -5
well, the BRF do have people to deal with the brit press, but I doubt they would do that for anyone not being part of the BRF. And they are not. Caros connection doesn't count. It's way too distant for them to care.
|
|
|
|
Post by duchess1 on May 29, 2012 5:27:39 GMT -5
It doesn't matter how or what he tries todo, people and indeed the media are not stupid. The horse bolted long ago regarding this so called love story, and most people don't buy it. IMO I do however see light at the end of the tunnel for the people of Monaco as this trainwreck will eventually run out of steam... Found this under the heading of ' MEDIA " in Monaco, and I quote, " Freedom of expression is legally guaranteed. However, there is a Penal Code prohibition on public denunciations of the ruling family. Otherwise, the government is said to uphold free speech and a free press. " www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Monaco.aspx What a joke, what free speech ?? |
|
|
|
Post by paca on May 29, 2012 6:39:18 GMT -5
since everything basically is considered related to the ruling family in MC this is just some clever legal wording to pretend to outsiders: look we do have free speech, when indeed they don't. That's the same with their money laundering and tax evasion. I remember that you used to have to live for 6 months in MC to get your tax free ticket. I read somewhere that it is down to 3 now.
|
|
|
|
Post by vamilkshake on May 29, 2012 8:16:14 GMT -5
From the Blog "Celebitchy" - a discussion of the Lawsuit and Charlene's possible pregnancy. They decide she looks better because she put on some weight.
Princess Charlene’s multiple Monaco photo-ops: depressed or perkier?
Princess Charlene and Prince Albert of Monaco were all over the place this past weekend. I’m including some photos from the events they did (together!) in Monaco, including a charity fashion show (Charlene wore orange-brown pleats), the Monaco Grand Prix (Charlene wore black and white stripes, with some great red lipstick) and the Formula One gala (Charlene wore a black evening gown). Oh, and they did a photo op for a charity for disabled people too – that’s the turquoise outfit. She and Albert did several other events too, but these are the ones I wanted to cover.
I’ve looked through all of our photos, and my general thought is that Charlene is still not pregnant. But! She has gained a little weight, which does give her a slightly knocked-up air. While I think Charlene and Albert negotiate these dual public appearances and make smiley faces for the cameras, I don’t think Charlene wants Albert to touch her at all in private, and God knows, maybe the feeling is mutual. From what the “sources” in Monaco say, poor Charlene is just a glorified broodmare and everyone in Monaco is SO disappointed in her. You would comfort-eat too. Meanwhile, remember how that French magazine reported (last year) that Charlene tried to escape Monaco three times only to have her passport confiscated? Albert said he was going to sue. And now he has:
Prince Albert of Monaco and his wife have launched a legal battle for libel damages over a front page story that appeared in The Sunday Times. The couple, who married last July, are demanding unlimited damages of more than £300,000 from publishers Times Newspapers over a story headlined “The Full Filthy Monte”, which was published the day after their wedding.
The story claimed that Prince Albert was guilty of being complicit in serious criminality and deliberately turning a blind eye to wide-scale financial corruption throughout Monaco, according to the couple.
The couple say the story meant he turned a blind eye to severe police brutality and abuse of power, and overlooked the criminal actions of money launderers and mobsters, despite his promise in 2005 that he would root out corruption and clean up the city state.
According to their High Court claim, the story said Prince Albert deliberately cultivated links with individuals involved in organised crime, allowing himself to be blackmailed into providing them with unlawful financial or other benefits, in return for their promise not to expose secrets about his private life.
Prince Albert, the story claimed, had bribed his bride Charlene Grimaldi into a sham marriage, forcibly preventing her from leaving the country shortly before their wedding by telling police at Nice airport to take her passport as she tried to flee, after discovering the truth about him fathering an illegitimate child during their relationship.
The court will hear how the paper claimed his wife had agreed to take part in a sham marriage, not because she loved him but because he paid her so much money to go through the pretence of an extravagant wedding that she agreed, despite the illegitimate child.
The prince and princess say the story, which continued on two inside pages, caused substantial damage to their reputations, as well as considerable hurt, distress and embarrassment.
They are also demanding aggravated damages, saying The Sunday Times failed to check the claims with them first.
The story – which carried the subhead “Behind a fairy tale wedding in Monaco lies rumours of murky money, abuse of power and a reluctant bride” – was published in the most sensational and inflammatory manner possible, and the allegations were then widely republished, they claim.
Now they are seeking damages, and an injunction banning the repetition of the allegations at the centre of their lawsuit.
[Via The UK Press Gazette]
From what I remember of Albert’s reaction to the story, he was seriously pissed off and Charlene just looked like a hostage agreeing with her captor. I have to think that while Albert wants The Sunday Times to admit a mistake and allow him to be publicly vindicated, when you introduce this kind of thing into the legal system, it’s going to end up a hot mess… for Albert and Charlene. If libel cases in France are anything like the libel cases in America, won’t The Sunday Times have to “prove” that they got part or all of their story right? Which means they’ll have to present evidence that Charlene did in fact try to pull a runner before the wedding. Which might be kind of easy to prove, you know?
|
|
|
|
Post by duchess1 on May 31, 2012 6:26:11 GMT -5
Well it seems Eringer has created a direct link to our royal board and this thread on his blog for all to see. Does this mean our opinions are highly valued ? vamilkshake you are quoted too.... www.eringer33.com/ Scroll down to Tuesday May 29th to read the link on " Royal opinions.... |
|
|
|
Post by vamilkshake on May 31, 2012 9:34:15 GMT -5
thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by paca on May 31, 2012 10:26:19 GMT -5
Eringer has always been reading here and taking info from here. He used translations done by members, posting them on his blog. AT least now he is giving credit where credit is due  Unlike other boards this one has people who know first hand what MC is like....and have become disillusioned, like himself. That way we can assess info more accurately then others. That is why we are such a thorn in trashys and fatberts flesh. We go beyond pretty photo ops. A lot that has been said here has later been confirmed by serious journalists. And we seem to have a pretty good collective memory. It is not easy to fool us. There is always someone who remembers a tiny, but important detail which sheds a new light on what they are trying to sell to us. Not mentioning our brilliant researchers.  |
|
|
|
Post by duchess1 on May 31, 2012 10:45:43 GMT -5
Eringer has always been reading here and taking info from here. He used translations done by members, posting them on his blog. AT least now he is giving credit where credit is due Unlike other boards this one has people who know first hand what MC is like....and have become disillusioned, like himself. That way we can assess info more accurately then others. That is why we are such a thorn in trashys and fatberts flesh. We go beyond pretty photo ops. A lot that has been said here has later been confirmed by serious journalists. And we seem to have a pretty good collective memory. It is not easy to fool us. There is always someone who remembers a tiny, but important detail which sheds a new light on what they are trying to sell to us. Not mentioning our brilliant researchers. Thanks paca, this truly is a wonderful board. It certainly looks like there are many people especially in monaco who watch this board and obviously two royal idiots who rant and rave and possibly get nervous when people in the know, speak the truth. |
|
|
|
Post by vamilkshake on May 31, 2012 16:05:36 GMT -5
I was thinking the other day that maybe Albert's aide that resigned did so over this stupid lawsuit. If Charlene pulled a runaway bride "truth is a defense" and there is no libel. If she pulled a runaway bride, the facts will support the story.
I think the problem in Monaco is that no one speaks "truth to power" and instead, Albert is surrounded by yes people. Which is why he is constantly shocked when things just don't go his way.
|
|
|
|
Post by hibou on May 31, 2012 19:43:18 GMT -5
Good job! The sugars must be going crazy! Karma! |
|
Unlike other boards this one has people who know first hand what MC is like....and have become disillusioned, like himself. That way we can assess info more accurately then others. That is why we are such a thorn in trashys and fatberts flesh. We go beyond pretty photo ops. A lot that has been said here has later been confirmed by serious journalists. And we seem to have a pretty good collective memory. It is not easy to fool us. There is always someone who remembers a tiny, but important detail which sheds a new light on what they are trying to sell to us. Not mentioning our brilliant researchers. 