Interesting news release by Stockwatch. They should read it carefully
before they release any more crap from their "reporters".
___________________________________
Robert Shore et al hit with $875,000 libel award
LOCAL LIBELLER MUST PAY $250,000
Robert Shore and his Vancouver Market News Publishing have to come up with
$250,000 to pay their share of damages won by Vancouver Sun business writer
David Baines following last September's libel trial in BC Supreme Court.
[ Note: the complete text of the Reasons For Judgement can be read at:
canada-stockwatch.com ]
Mr Justice John Rowan assessed $250,000 in general damages jointly and
severally against tout-sheet journalist George Chelekis, Market News and Mr
Shore. The total award to Mr Baines was $875,000 -- the second highest in
Canadian legal history -- which included $50,000 for a slander by Mr
Chelekis made against Mr Baines in 1995. Justice Rowan said co-complainant
Southam Inc was not damaged by the defamations and dismissed its action,
leaving Mr Baines the sole beneficiary.
Mr Shore was described by the judge as being one and the same as Market
News. Either his or Market News' legal and libel costs may be partly
covered through Wawanesa Insurance. Wawanesa reportedly offered Mr Baines
and the Sun $50,000 ahead of the trial, but this was rejected as
inadequate. What is not known is whether $50,000 is the extent of Mr
Shore's libel coverage or whether Wawanesa's lawyer was simply making a
low-ball offer.
The awards stem from a series of libels -- two of which (one story and one
press release) were distributed by Mr Shore's news service -- in 1994. In
these, Mr Chelekis alleged Mr Baines traded against his column and that he
and Howe Street investigator Adrian du Plessis conspired to drive down the
price of stocks over a six-year period. They were in league with short
sellers, Mr Chelekis said in a story that attributed none of the
information to named sources, and they hoarded their ill-gotten gains in
offshore banks.
Individually, Mr Chelekis was assessed $350,000, in addition to being named
jointly and severally in the remaining $525,000 of the overall assessment.
The libels originally were carried in two articles written by Mr Chelekis
in the August and October 1994 editions of stock tout-sheet Bull & Bear
Financial Newspaper, published in Florida by David Robinson. Both the Bull
& Bear and Mr Robinson were also held liable for the defamations, although
neither were represented in court. A third libel was contained in a press
release that also was distributed by Market News, but no complaint was made
by Southam or Mr Baines for damages against Market News or Mr Shore
relating to this press release.
A TWO DOLLAR LIBEL-SERVICE
The court was especially concerned that various untrue statements about Mr
Baines were forwarded by Market News for worldwide distribution through
links with Star Data and Bloomberg. "By supplying its material to
Bloomberg, Market News can, and sometimes does, achieve worldwide
distribution of the material it publishes," Mr Justice Rowan notes.
The judge also noted that Mr Chelekis paid Mr Shore $2 to publish the
libellous October article. "Why the payment was $2 is not apparent," Judge
Rowan says. "Perhaps it was under a mistaken idea on Shore's part that this
might absolve him from responsibility for what Chelekis wrote."
Although Mr Chelekis was the most culpable for the defamations, the local
man, Mr Shore, also was singled out for harsh comments from the judge in
his reasons for judgement. Most notably, the court decided Mr Shore
"intended" to libel Mr Baines, a nationally recognized business writer and
bete noir of Howe Street frauds and scam artists.
The judge also says he viewed publication of the October 1994 article as
the most egregious and damaging of the libels, and it was for writing and
distributing this article that Mr Chelekis, Mr Shore, and Market News
"shall be liable for the sum of $250,000 damages for the libels contained
in the second article and publishing them."
The court also assessed Mr Chelekis and Mr Robinson separately an
additional $200,000 in damages for writing and publishing the second Bull &
Bear article. That assessment was made in spite of the Bull & Bear's modest
circulation of 26,500 -- of which only 217 were distributed in BC.
The judge assessed Mr Chelekis, who describes himself as an award-winning
journalist, $100,000 for writing a libellous press release announcing the
second story.
Mr Chelekis was not represented in court because his lawyers had resigned
shortly before the trial, stating they could not contact their client. Mr
Robinson also was not represented in court.
The smallest defamation was made before a shocked audience at a mining
conference in Vancouver in May 1995. In this slander, Mr Chelekis said Mr
Baines was HIV positive and cruised gay bars with Mr du Plessis. "Many
might realize the statement was a lie, but it was an outrageous lie,
uttered with malice and meant to destroy Baines."
In addition, the colourful Mr Chelekis was hit for $100,000 in special
damages and $100,000 in punitive damages.
LIES
In his remarks concerning punitive damages, the judge said that in the
course of his defamatory "campaign", Mr Chelekis "manufactured three
separate and deliberate lies." He states the first lie was that David
Baines threatened his life; the second, that Mr Baines was trading against
his column; and third, that Mr Baines was involved in a homosexual
relationship with Adrian du Plessis. "It was Chelekis' intention to inflict
on Baines the maximum damage he could," he states.
In assessing aggravated damages, Justice Rowan summarized Mr Chelekis'
conduct as "arrogant, vindictive and continuous." The judge noted that in a
December 19, 1994 letter to Sun business editor Gerald Prosalendis, Mr
Chelekis stated: "This program will continue until Mr Baines is left with
zero credibility."
"His intention was to destroy Baines' career," continues the judge. "With
that in mind, he arranged for the publication and republication of his
articles with the intention they would reach a worldwide audience. He did
reach the worldwide audience."
Mr Chelekis, the Bull & Bear, and its publisher David Robinson were jointly
and severally assessed $75,000 for the August libel, and $200,000 for the
September libel.
MORE TO COME
Mr du Plessis, who is pursuing his own legal action against the same list
of defendents for the identical defamation, says he is extremely encouraged
by the high dollar award. "That cannot be read as anything but very good
news for my legal position, and my lawyers are very confident and very
encouraged by this decision," Mr du Plessis says. "We'll be going at it
like gangbusters. This now is part of our ammunition."
The freelance investigator notes that aside from the HIV charge levelled at
Mr Baines, he was named in every one of Mr Baines' defamations. "It's a
rare situation where counsel can not only point to a similar fact pattern,
but in this case you can say we are dealing with identical libels. We're
like the two halves of this case."
Mr du Plessis also argues that a court may be even more inclined to
sympathize with his complaint because while Mr Baines' employer would have
stood by him regardless of the defamations, as a freelancer he is in a
particularly vulnerable position. "My whole job in securities investigation
is my reputation," he says. "It could be argued that I'm entitled to a much
larger award than Baines. But the other side could use that and argue that
I'm entitled to much less because I'm not working for a major newspaper."
Alluding to a theory that Mr Chelekis' attacks were financed by well-known
Vancouver moneymen, Mr du Plessis also says the decision "sends a message
to the Howe Street cabals that these sorts of sleazy campaigns will not
ultimately succeed."
On March 10, 1998, Mr du Plessis won a default judgement against Mr
Chelekis; damages and costs are to be assessed, a court document states.
Defense lawyer Brayan Baynham, QC, who defended Mr Shore after the
publisher sued Wawanesa, indicates an appeal may be in the works. While
saying it is too early to say for sure, he says first, the judge did not
take into account Mr Shore's heartfelt and sincere apology, and that the
amount of the judgement against his client was extraordinary.
Mr Baynham says the defense had accepted that there would be a judgement
against his client "because he did publish it." What apparently surprised
Mr Baynham was that there was no reduction in the award because Mr Shore
apologized "immediately after he realized he published it . . . The fact
that Shore apologized, I thought would have been reflected in a very
sizeable reduction in the award against Shore vis-a-vis Chelekis."
The "heartfelt and sincere apology" from Mr Shore for "disseminating an
article that made allegations that Vancouver Sun business writer David
Baines was trading against his column" appeared the day the trial began --
September 8, 1997, three years after original publication. "The allegations
against Mr Baines were completely false," the statement read. "We sincerely
apologize to Mr Baines and the Vancouver Sun for disseminating this
material and for any inconvenience or embarrassment this may have caused."
The trial proceeded.
The plaintiff's side scoffed at what amounted to a courthouse-steps
apology. During the trial Mr Shore approached Mr Baines outside the
courtroom with another late effort at a personal apology. Mr Baines
pointedly rejected Mr Shore's overture, saying it came too late and that he
doubted his sincerity. A frantic Mr Shore then made a less-than-moving
apology to Mr Baines while he was on the stand. He has not apologized to Mr
du Plessis, but in court explained it this way: "I haven't had an
opportunity to discuss that with my attorney."
Mr Baynham also says an appeal also could be based on the size of the
award, which is more than double the size of the previous record holder in
BC, and five times his lowball offer. "Obviously, there's a potential
ground for appeal insofar as the total amount of the awards are concerned,
the global amount; it's an extraordinary judgement in that regard," he
says.
The star of the trial, Mr Chelekis, seems to have disappeared. Like Elvis,
there are occasional reports of Chelekis sightings, although the once
flamboyant tout-sheet luminary now maintains a very low profile. The
Securities and Exchange Commission had charged Mr Chelekis with illegal
profits of at least US$1.1 million from his touting activities and early in
1997 he was fined US$162,000. Soon after, he was effectively banned from
the VSE, where he had worked for dozens of companies.
(c) Copyright 1998 Canjex Publishing Ltd. canada-stockwatch.com
[ Note: the complete text of the Reasons For Judgement can be read at:
canada-stockwatch.com ]
***************************************************************************
This is a Stockwatch investigative report and is NOT sponsored by any other
party. IT IS ALSO NOT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY SECURITY!
To remove yourself from this mailing list, access this URL:
canada-stockwatch.com
***************************************************************************
________________________
JW |
