In This Section
TV Guide Spotlight
Also on TVGuide.com
|
« Today's News: Our Take
Eva's Tony Sues Website for $40 Mil, Says He "Never Laid Eyes" on Mistress
Eva Longoria and Tony Parker by Eric Charbonneau/WireImage.com
Perhaps realizing that the statement he originally issued reeked of a nondenial that he cheated on bride Eva Longoria, Tony Parker has sued the gossip site that gave French model Alexandra Parresant a forum. "It never happened," says the lawsuit, which seeks $40 million in damages. "And X17 [Online] had to know that the story was false, or, at the very least, it had to have entertained serious doubts about the credibility of its supposed source." (Watch related video here.) The suit claims X17 never contacted the couple or their peeps before running with the tale, and refused to retract it after being told the claims were false.
"Tony adamantly and unconditionally denies ever having laid eyes on this woman, let alone having had an affair with her," Parker's lawyer told the AP on Wednesday. As for Paressant's story that she first fielded a pass from the NBA star at his own nuptials, "There were a lot of people at the wedding," says the lawyer. "Did they remember seeing her at the wedding? No." Then again, maybe she was stuck at the corner table by the band with creepy Uncle Clem and chatty Cousin Jerome.
Related:
• Eva Stands by "Perfect Husband" Amid Affair Buzz
|
TVGuide Links:
|
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2007 7:06 PM
|
"Never laid eyes" on her, eh?
So he was blindfolded? Hot! 
Seriously, I don't think there's any reason to believe this woman, but I've felt that way in the past and been horribly let down ("I did not have sexual relations with this woman, Miss Lewinsky")...
|
|
Dec 19, 2007 10:23 PM
|
You might be on to something, Gord. It doesn't say anything about where he may have laid his hands, either.
Sorry.
Hopefully the allegations aren't true, and we won't be subjected to grammar lessons again. I still don't know what the definition of "is" is!
|
|
Dec 20, 2007 12:53 AM
|
Tony Parker is also suing the gossip website which revealed the affair for $40 million dollars...
...which even a 2-year old could defeat that argument by using the First Amendment.
|
|
Dec 20, 2007 1:09 AM
|
|
zinger - the 1st amendment doesn't protect anyone from being sued for libel (printed lies) or slander (spoken lies). I assume that libel is the basis of this lawsuit.
|
|
Dec 20, 2007 6:46 AM
|
You know, I probably would have forgotten all about this story if the Longoria-Parkers would've let it drop already and quit bringing it up in the media.
Does the phrase "ye doth protest too much" come to mind?
|
|
Dec 20, 2007 7:24 AM
|
Um, Matt, shouldn't that headline read "alleged Mistress"?
You know, this story, from the start, has sounded weird to me. Like someone wanting to cash in on a chance meeting. Okay, some sports figures are cads, but Parker has never appeared to be one of them. And at his own wedding? A bit much, I think. What is the motive for this woman to go public with this alleged incident? Money? Fame? At this point, I'm skeptical that it ever happened.
|
|
Dec 20, 2007 9:49 AM
|
Um, Matt, shouldn't that headline read "alleged Mistress"?
I ran out of space. But "mistress" (in quotes) was in an earlier draft. - MWM
|
|
Dec 20, 2007 11:22 AM
|
honbun26, X17 can rely on the First Amendment as long as it accurately reported what Alexandra Parresant said, and had no reason to believe she was lying. Tony Parker, in order to win his lawsuit, will have to prove not only that X17 knew or should have known that Parresant was lying, but, as a celebrity, he'll have to prove that they published her lies maliciously, meaning they intended to damage Parker's reputation. He will further have to prove damage to his reputation (he lost endorsements, his wife no longer wants to be seen with him in public, he's no longer invited to red carpets or comped at clubs, his wedding guests want their presents back, his teammates ostracize him).
Unlike in the UK or France, suing a publication (Website) for defamation in the US is an uphill battle for a celebrity. If Parresant's allegations are false, or if they're true and she can't prove them, he has a better chance suing her, but her pockets aren't as deep. X17 didn't use an anonymous source, but they should have at least given Parker the opportunity to deny her allegations in the same story.
It'll look really bad, though, if they didn't ask her to show them her wedding invitation or a photo of her taken at the wedding or the names of guests at the wedding she was seated with or spoke to or someone who might have seen the two of them in a compromising situation.
|
|
Dec 20, 2007 11:45 AM
|
|
Sheldon - I know...I learned that in law school as well. I was just giving a very brief response to zinger. I get tired of the 1st amendment flag waving as if its an ultimate protection to every form of speech.
|
|
Dec 20, 2007 1:27 PM
|
|
ALL LIES.
|
|
Dec 20, 2007 3:10 PM
|
|
This reminds me of when Tom Cruise sued the guy who said they had an affair. And so now we know for sure that TC's not gay.
|
|
Dec 20, 2007 3:14 PM
|
|
I would be more inclined to believe the Parkers if they had sued the model rather than the tabloid. Mr. and Mrs. Parker are filthy rich I am sure they don't need the tabloid's loot. I say sue the liar instead.
|
|
Dec 20, 2007 10:16 PM
|
|
The Parkers should have sued both the liar and the filthy rag that printed her lies. These tabloids spread more crap than a manure truck and don't care who they hurt in the process. Hit them where you will get their attention...the pocketbook. Maybe then they will develop some journalistic integrity.
|
|
Dec 29, 2007 1:19 AM
|
|
|
