[Peepers]

BREAKING NEWS: Libel suit against Mayor Rob Ford dismissed

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/12/27/libel-suit-against-mayor-rob-ford-dismissed

At the above link you can read the judges decision in full. The judge concluded that even if the plaintiff had been able to prove libel, the maximum damages that would have been awarded would have only amounted to $20,000 - a far cry from $6 Million! Foulidis is now forced to pay for the legal costs of Rob Ford which I suspect will be well into the six-figures. Together with his own Lawyers fees which will be equally substantial - this decision could be financially ruinous for Foulidis! Looks good on him!

TORONTO - A $6-million libel lawsuit against Mayor Rob Ford has been dismissed.

In a decision from Justice John Macdonald released Thursday, the judge says lawyers for Boardwalk Cafe owner George Foulidis failed to prove that comments Ford made alleging corruption damaged Foulidis’s reputation.

Macdonald said Foulidis’s lawyers failed to prove the words Ford spoke during a Toronto Sun editorial board meeting referred to the businessman and were defamatory.

“In my view, having found that the plaintiff has failed to prove his case, there is no good reason why I should make findings of fact or express conclusions about either the defences raised, or the issue of express malice,” Macdonald wrote in the 16-page decision.

Foulidis launched the lawsuit during the 2010 mayoral campaign after Ford, who was then a candidate, alleged the sole-source deal he reached with the city to run the cafe was corrupt.

 

[ShonTron]

I'm not surprised by this decision.

Ford was correct that the Boardwalk Cafe deal stunk, and it still stinks. He was stupid about the way he said as such, which got the case heard.

Fouldis and Ford deserved each other. Such a shame things worked out the way they did, it could have been a great relationship!

 

[Peepers]

Ford was correct that the Boardwalk Cafe deal stunk, and it still stinks. He was stupid about the way he said as such, which got the case heard.

Actually I don't think that Ford was stupid at all in his comments to the SUN editorial board. His comments suggest that he is smarter than most people give him credit for being. Notice how after he made the comment about the Tuggs deal "stinking to high-heaven" Ford immediately followed up with "I can't prove anything" "I can't pinpoint". In other words, Ford was making it clear that what he was stating was his personal opinion only (protected free speech) and he was not trying to assert as a fact - that the Tuggs deal was in fact corrupt. In other words, Ford was inoculating himself from the claim of libel. It would be these simple phrases uttered by Rob Ford that would cause the judge to dismiss the case.

Anyone can sue anybody for anything. Just because someone sues you does not mean that you did something bad or "stupid". At the end of the day Rob Ford was completely vindicated. Not only was the libel case dismissed, the judge found that the plaintiff tried to deceive the courts. Furthermore the judge found that the plaintiff could not even prove that he was the owner of "Tuggs Inc" - the company that Ford was alleged to have libeled.

All that is left is for the judge to decide how much of Ford's legal bill Foulidis is required to pay. I think he should be responsible for 100% of Fords legal costs. After the hell that he has put Mayor Ford and his family through, I truly hope that Foulidis is financially wiped out by this judgement.

Now that the civil litigation is behind him, I hope that Ford will call for a full-scale criminal investigation into every person involved in approving this very dubious contract. Minutes of in-camera meeting's need to be unsealed and current and former politicians must be ordered to testify under oath and under the threat of perjury about what they know are the true facts surrounding this rotten deal.

To those who think that Ford was being "stupid" for speaking out against this rotten contract what would you prefer? Would you prefer that the politicians who we elect to look after our best interests keep their mouth's shut about potential acts of corruption lest they be sued for defamation?

In the end, the judges decision was not only a victory for Rob Ford, it was a victory for free-speech, and with it, democracy, and ultimately, Freedom itself!

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Peepers, there's a huge difference between defending yourself against claims of libel and launching a criminal investigation. Celebrate his victory - but ask yourself this. If THIS judge made the right call, why are you so sure that OTHER judge is a cretin who doesn't know the law?

BTW, your last paragraph is awesome trolling... congrats on that, had me convinced you actually meant it for a minute! ;-)

 

[cassius]

I'm certainly anti-Ford but I'm happy that this case has been thrown out by the judge. Indeed Foulidis should be responsible for paying all of Ford legal fees as there hasn't been any wrong-doing on Ford's part in this case. Now as for whether or not the Tuggs deal "stinks" I don't know enough about it. But if it does I applaud Ford for bringing it to people's attention, even if nothing is ultimately being done. Perhaps it'll make people think twice in the future when trying to make a questionable deal.

Also, I almost spewed my drink when I read Peepers' last sentence in his post above

 

[Automation Gallery]

BTW, your last paragraph is awesome trolling... congrats on that, had me convinced you actually meant it for a minute! ;-)

Ahh come-on, such nonsense......nothing good could be said about Rob Ford on this forum without getting criticized.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Ahh come-on, such nonsense......nothing good could be said about Rob Ford on this forum without getting criticized.

"In the end, the judges decision was not only a victory for Rob Ford, it was a victory for free-speech, and with it, democracy, and ultimately, Freedom itself!"

>> AG, here, read it again. This has a Ayn Rand-like over exuberance, wouldn't you say? That's not saying something 'good' about Ford, it's saying his successfully defending himself against a libel claim is a 'victory for Freedom itself!' His capitalization, his exclamation point. And, I'd be happy if Peepers will weigh in on my other comment -- why is this judge so intelligent, and the other crooked as a walking stick?

 

[ShonTron]

Ahh come-on, such nonsense......nothing good could be said about Rob Ford on this forum without getting criticized.

I have something good to say about Ford - the judge's decision was the right one and Ford was right to win this case. He certainly had more credibility than Fouldis.

 

[rm20010]

Can't say I'm surprised by the case either, but I have no idea why Ford is spinning this victory to be another reason why he'll "fight for the taxpayers." I mean, it was a personal issue and had nothing to do with him being mayor.

 

[Bruvyman]

I have something good to say about Ford - the judge's decision was the right one and Ford was right to win this case. He certainly had more credibility than Fouldis.

ShonTron: I don't disagree that the Boardwalk deal seems suspicious given that it was sole-sourced and a LONG term, but why is that Mr. Fouladis' fault? What evidence is there that he has no credibility? I only ask because you have spoken bad of him twice on this page. You even went so far as to say that he deserves Rob Ford! What is he to deserve such comment, some sort of kitten torturer? Why such harsh words?

 

[ShonTron]

ShonTron: I don't disagree that the Boardwalk deal seems suspicious given that it was sole-sourced and a LONG term, but why is that Mr. Fouladis' fault? What evidence is there that he has no credibility? I only ask because you have spoken bad of him twice on this page. You even went so far as to say that he deserves Rob Ford! What is he to deserve such comment, some sort of kitten torturer? Why such harsh words?

To his credibilty, I'll quote Justice Macdonald:

“Having considered this in the context of the whole of the evidence, I am left with serious doubt about [Foulidis'] credibility and reliability of his testimony, particularly where it is in conflict with other credible evidence, but also where it is not confirmed or supported by other evidence."

Macdonald on Foulidis attempting to mislead the court, as quoted in The Star:

Macdonald said Foulidis proved that he was viewed as a person involved with the business — but not that he was “the face of Tuggs, or its alter ego.” And he dismissed Foulidis’ claim that his absence from the corporate profile was a simple mistake: Foulidis, he wrote, had attempted to “mislead” the court about his participation in a 1990s insurance fraud.

 

[Bruvyman]

Fair enough, I suppose, but I had heard your first quote from McDonald's ruling last night on the radio and didn't immediately take it as gospel that he IS a person with no credibility who deserves the likes of Rob Ford. Not defending him, just not going to be quick to rush to judgement.

My interest in your characterization of Foulidis stems from the public bashing he has been taking lately in the media and on sites like this. Other than the Judge's doubt about his credibility, I have heard no other credible reason for the public hate. It seems that because he was the recipient of a deal that seems too good to be true automatically reflects badly on his character, when I think the blame should be on those who approved such a deal. He is a businessman who's duty it is to get the best possible deal for himself, his family and his employees.

A lot of the hate, I'm sure, comes from those who would defend Rob Ford to the bitter end including attacks on those who would challenge him no matter the reason.

I guess I have a soft spot for Foulidis' position because he HAS become a bit of a pariah for only doing what any smart business man should and I'm sure that the comments from Ford and the media did have a huge effect on him and on his family. Did he lie cheat and steal to get the deal? I can't say, but I have never seen the evidence so I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Let's not forget that it was Rob Ford who was on trial here.

 

[rm20010]

Besides the sudden reversal of the levee cancellation, here's another 360:

Reversing his previous position, Rob Ford now says he wants council to reappoint him as mayor, not call a byelection, if he is forced out of office.

“It’s up to the council. They’re going to either appoint somebody or we’re going to have a byelection. They have two options, and hopefully I’ll get appointed — hopefully I’ll win the appeal, and if I don’t, then hopefully I get appointed. If not, then we have to go to the polls,” Ford said during an unscheduled call to Newstalk 1010 on Thursday.

Ford and his brother, Councillor Doug Ford, had both pressed for a byelection in the month since a judge evicted the mayor over a violation of the provincial Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.

“In my biased view, they should let the people speak: they should have a byelection and let people run,” Rob Ford said on his Newstalk show on Dec. 2.

“The people of this city should decide on who is going to be running this city, not politicians, not judges, not generals, but the people of Toronto,” Doug Ford said on Dec. 11. Asked a week earlier about the estimated cost of a byelection, now pegged as high as $9 million, he said: “What price do you put on democracy?”

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/cit...wants-to-be-reappointed-not-face-a-byelection

 

[adma]

If that happens, it truly would be a Bizarro Toronto.

No, seriously. If the "Ford proxy" were someone like, say, Michael Thompson, he could easily-enough win on a "Ford council agenda" while plastering the Ford stink away...

 

[adma]

In the end, the judges decision was not only a victory for Rob Ford, it was a victory for free-speech, and with it, democracy, and ultimately, Freedom itself!

But, to awaken the spectres that have gotten me into UT trouble in the past, it's a slippery slope. Like, one can stand up for those advocating an Adam Lanza to go bonkers at a Ford Fest--or at the other end of the spectrum, a Spacing magazine launch--or to be bipartisan, at the City Hall clamshell itself. Like, some/most/all of us might find that profoundly disagreeable (to say the least); yet, you know. It may be outer-limits, but it's certainly "Freedom itself".


Of course, the Peeperses of the world tend to be too obtuse (and by the tone of his statement, too much in a state of arrested pubescence) to realize the fact.