Legal News

Judge Blocks Beckham Shot at Questioning Prostitute

By Matthew Heller, Editor

Soccer star David Beckham has suffered a setback in his $25 million libel suit against the publisher of In Touch Weekly as a Los Angeles judge denied his request to question the former prostitute who claims to have slept with him.

Irma Nici's allegations of sex trysts at hotels in New York and London were the centerpiece of the In Touch story entitled ?David's Dangerous Betrayal? that was published in the Oct. 4 issue. Beckham, who has denied even meeting Nici, sued her and Bauer Publishing for defamation.

Bauer, which is based in Germany, filed an anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss the suit, saying its ?report on Beckham's most recent extramarital affair ... plainly involves Bauer's exercise of its free-speech rights about a matter of public interest.? And U.S. District Judge Manuel L. Real ruled after a hearing Jan. 10 that Beckham could not take the depositions of Nici and In Touch's editor as part of his response to the motion.

?Without this evidence ... Beckham would be severely prejudiced in opposing the anti-SLAPP motion and demonstrating Bauer's willful blindness to the falsity of Nici's story and Bauer's malicious intentions to publish a salacious story about Beckham to sell magazines,? he had argued in a brief.

In his ruling, Real said Beckham failed to meet the legal standard, which requires that the discovery requested by a plaintiff is "essential" to oppose an anti-SLAPP motion. ?Beckham's proposed discovery is precisely the type of fishing expedition ? resulting only in delays and high costs ? that the anti-SLAPP statute is designed to prevent,? Bauer argued.

The lurid In Touch story spared few details, with Nici claiming she staged a ?girl-on-girl show? for Beckham with another prostitute. ?I have never met Nici, let alone committed adultery with Nici or paid her for sex,? he stated in a declaration.

Beckham argued that Nici's deposition was ?unquestionably essential to showing Bauer's actual malice. Bauer interviewed Nici twice, but ... has provided insufficient and incomplete details about what Nici said during those interviews. Beckham is entitled to Nici's testimony regarding the full details of both interviews ...?

In response, Bauer said ?there is nothing to be served by discovery in this 'he said', 'she said' contest. Beckham and Nici both know the truth and to be sure one of them is 'lying', to use Beckham's word. Who that is, and who is telling the truth, is not before the court in the pending [anti-SLAPP] motion.?

The motion argues that Beckham has ?an established reputation as a serial adulterer? and that the anti-SLAPP law applies to its story because ?the public takes an interest in Beckham and, in particular, his marriage? to former Victoria "Posh Spice" Beckham.

?Beckham's international fame, the fame of his marriage to Victoria coupled with the emerging trend of high-profile stars (e.g., Tiger Woods) cheating on their wives, causes this report to fall squarely within the statute's broad definition of 'public interest,'? Bauer said.

For her part, Nici ? a ?$10,000-a-night hooker? who sold her story to In Touch for a relatively modest $50,000 ? said ?Beckham's premature request for unilateral discovery is beyond harassing[;] it is unjust and what is more ... contrary to law.?

By Matthew Heller
On Point

Full post as published by On Point News on January 12, 2011 (boomark / email).