UK's Daily Mail to pay Melania Trump damages over modelling claims

[webfact]

UK's Daily Mail to pay Melania Trump damages over modelling claims

REUTERS

 

U.S. first lady Melania Trump listens to students perform as she and China's first lady Peng Liyuan (not pictured) visit Bak Middle School of the Arts in West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S., April 7, 2017. REUTERS/Joe Skipper

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain's Daily Mail agreed on Wednesday to pay Melania Trump an undisclosed sum and issue an apology after it published an article saying the U.S. First Lady had offered "services beyond simply modelling" in her former job.

 

President Donald Trump's wife, 46, had sued the publisher of the DailyMail in Britain and also filed a $150 million (120 million pound) lawsuit against it in New York, claiming the article had cost her millions of dollars in potential business.

 

A person familiar with the situation said the settlement was worth less than $3 million, including legal costs and damages.

 

The Daily Mail, which runs what it calls the world's largest English-language newspaper website, apologised for the article on Wednesday and issued a retraction on its home page.

 

"An article on 20th August 2016 about Melania Trump... questioned the nature of her work as a professional model, and republished allegations that she provided services beyond simply modelling," publisher Associated Newspapers said.

 

"We accept that these allegations about Mrs Trump are not true and we retract and withdraw them .... we have agreed to pay her damages and costs."

 

At the High Court in London, Trump's lawyer said the article, headlined "Racy photos and troubling questions about his wife's past that could derail Trump", was published as a two-page spread and accompanied by an old photo of Melania Trump standing naked with her front against a wall but looking back at the camera.

 

"Readers of the newspaper that day could not fail to miss the article", John Kelly told the court. "The article included false and defamatory claims about the claimant which questioned the nature of her work as a professional model.

 

"The suggestion that such allegations even merit investigation is deeply offensive and has caused a great deal of upset and distress to the claimant," he said.

 

(Reporting by Costas Pitas, Michael Holden and Kate Holton; editing by Stephen Addison)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-04-13

[ezzra]

19 minutes ago, webfact said:

A person familiar with the situation said the settlement was worth less than $3 million, including legal costs and damages.

 

And the rich get richer, even by suing other people they get MO' MONEY..... 

[thaibeachlovers]

This time they picked on someone that could actually fight back, and they lost. Will the incompetents that invented and published the slander be punished though?

[Langsuan Man]

1 hour ago, webfact said:

claiming the article had cost her millions of dollars in potential business.

No matter how much they settled for , the fact that she claimed potential loss of business will stick in the public's mind since she was not elected so has no expectation that being the First squeeze should translate into $$$$$$

[lupin]

20 minutes ago, Langsuan Man said:

No matter how much they settled for , the fact that she claimed potential loss of business will stick in the public's mind since she was not elected so has no expectation that being the First squeeze should translate into $$$$$$

The article was published long before she was first lady...........

[Langsuan Man]

3 minutes ago, lupin said:

The article was published long before she was first lady...........

Did you miss the potential part ? 

[lupin]

1 minute ago, Langsuan Man said:

Did you miss the potential part ? 

You refer to a potential loss of business ... not the potential of becoming first lady. Both mutually exclusive. I think many will think her claim of "potential loss of business" is/was completely valid.

[Stupooey]

What amazes me is that anyone believes people will take something written in the Daily Mail seriously. Prayut's most (only?) sensible ruling has been to ban this comic in Thailand.

[Langsuan Man]

27 minutes ago, lupin said:

You refer to a potential loss of business ... not the potential of becoming first lady. Both mutually exclusive. I think many will think her claim of "potential loss of business" is/was completely valid.

Quote

Melania Trump lawsuit complains of loss of 'once in a lifetime opportunity' to profit from role as first lady

Quote

Melania Trump believes that she has lost out on a “once in a lifetime opportunity” to profit from the presidency, following a scurrilous report that she once worked as an escort.

Mrs Trump is suing the corporation that publishes the Daily Mail's website in New York for $150 million for reporting rumours that she worked as an escort. The story has since been retracted, but on Monday the first lady’s lawyers argued that it had prevented her from expanding her business.

Mrs Trump, according to the law suit, was intending to sell shoes, perfume, jewellery and cosmetics while in the White House.

source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/07/melania-trump-re-files-lawsuit-againstdaily-mail/

[just.a.thought]

They got away too easy. The punishment for printing lies in newspapers is not severe enough. It doesn't matter who the article is about,it's misleading the readers.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

[Ramen087]

2 hours ago, ezzra said:

And the rich get richer, even by suing other people they get MO' MONEY..... 

She won the settlement because the claims of her offering services beyond modeling were untrue.  She defended her honor and won.  How can she be faulted her for that?  Her wealth had nothing to do with it.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, Langsuan Man said:

No matter how much they settled for , the fact that she claimed potential loss of business will stick in the public's mind since she was not elected so has no expectation that being the First squeeze should translate into $$$$$$

??????

She was a business woman before Trump ran for POTUS. Why do you equate being first lady with making money? Her business probably did suffer. Regardless, she didn't have to prove it was so as the paper settled.

[lupin]

1 hour ago, Langsuan Man said:

source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/07/melania-trump-re-files-lawsuit-againstdaily-mail/

that's what the article says... not what YOU said.

[Grouse]

A pleasure to see The Daily Mail punished for printing untruths

 

If only they were always punished when they publish lies

 

Utterly disreputable rag

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, Stupooey said:

What amazes me is that anyone believes people will take something written in the Daily Mail seriously. Prayut's most (only?) sensible ruling has been to ban this comic in Thailand.

 

But sadly and ironically, the type of person who buys the DM or uses it's website for news, is actually likely to believe all they write.

 

 

[thaihome]

I think it is indeed a good thing that Melania pursued this case. The "trophy" escort/ girlfriend/wife business does not publicly operate as described in DM article.  It's very important for participants in that business to refute such allegations ?. 

 

I do find the justfication for the monetary damages her lawyers included in the filing very telling of the Trump mindset.  

 

I just don't understand how some can deny the Trumps are not in this to make money, amoung other reasons. If you think that is OK,  then just say so, but don't deny what is obvious. 

TH 

 

[dunroaming]

Good result!  Whatever the past activities of Mrs Trump is irrelevant and for the Daily Mail to get a kicking is a win win all round in my opinion.

[funandsuninbangkok]

This article was part of a major mud slinging campaign by the Democrats. Similar reports in the US and ,of course, the reports of the DM original report were front page on NYT and WP. FAKE NEWS EXISTS. 

 

I suppose Repubs may have considered similar fake news about Hilary but who would believe it?

[Basil B]

8 hours ago, just.a.thought said:

They got away too easy. The punishment for printing lies in newspapers is not severe enough. It doesn't matter who the article is about,it's misleading the readers.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

Funny how the truth tends to bite some people in the bum...   Hope her claim that the accusations were untrue are correct, I recall a few British politicians have sued over libel only to be found to have purged themselves years later.  

[stevenl]

This article was part of a major mud slinging campaign by the Democrats. Similar reports in the US and ,of course, the reports of the DM original report were front page on NYT and WP. FAKE NEWS EXISTS. 
 
I suppose Repubs may have considered similar fake news about Hilary but who would believe it?

Nothing to do with the democrats.

sent using Tapatalk

[dunroaming]

1 hour ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

This article was part of a major mud slinging campaign by the Democrats. Similar reports in the US and ,of course, the reports of the DM original report were front page on NYT and WP. FAKE NEWS EXISTS. 

 

I suppose Repubs may have considered similar fake news about Hilary but who would believe it?

Meanwhile back on planet earth...  The Mail is a right wing (some would say very) tabloid.  Polar opposite of the "lefties" but let's not get bogged down with reality.

[thaihome]

5 hours ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

This article was part of a major mud slinging campaign by the Democrats. Similar reports in the US and ,of course, the reports of the DM original report were front page on NYT and WP. FAKE NEWS EXISTS. 

 

I suppose Repubs may have considered similar fake news about Hilary but who would believe it?

 

Actually you would be hard pressed to show a front page item by either the NYT or  on the DM article.  If they did, don't you think they would have been included in the lawsuit? They both have fully reported on the court case and the contents of Melania's  lawsuit.

 

In fact, the NYT reprimanded a report for verbally repeating the rumor (not publishing it), which may be why you are confused.

 http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2017/02/nyt-reprimands-reporter-for-calling-melania-trump-a-hooker-234962

TH 

[ilostmypassword]

6 hours ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

This article was part of a major mud slinging campaign by the Democrats. Similar reports in the US and ,of course, the reports of the DM original report were front page on NYT and WP. FAKE NEWS EXISTS. 

 

I suppose Repubs may have considered similar fake news about Hilary but who would believe it?

Next thing you know they'll be saying she lied about her university degree or the fact that she worked illegally in the USA.