Could John Edwards sue the natl. enquirer if they are lying about his love-child?

Question

shouldn't he address the accusaitons and threaten a libel suit besides just saying that it's all tabloid trash? he IS a friggin lawyer after all..

Answer 1

Why shouldn't John sued them.  He made his career and money suing for reasons that were later proved to be false.

Edwards' specialty was cerebral palsy, a set of permanent conditions affecting control of movement and posture that usually appear at toddler stage. There is no cure, although stem cell studies in both humans (umbilical cord cells) and rats (neural cells) have produced promising results. More than 10,000 U.S. children are diagnosed with it yearly. Edwards claimed the disease developed because negligent doctors ignored fetal heart monitors indicating the child might not be getting enough air during birth and thus failed to deliver it immediately through cesarean surgery.

Yet Edwards won his cases not because scientific evidence favored him but because of his smooth-talking "trust-me" demeanor -- and heart-wrenching pleas in which he ghoulishly sometimes pretended to be the voice of the unfortunate child crying out for justice.

Answer 2

He could sue, but if the child is his, then he would be foolish to sue. Even if the story is false, he would have to establish malicious intent to win a verdict. The National Enquirer has been successfully sued several times, and if he is innocent, then he should sue that rag.

Answer 3

As a lawyer, I am quite sure Mr.Edwards realizes that parody and satire are protected free speech.  The National Enquirer is a satirical publication...

Answer 4

But what will Sean Hannity use for show prep??

Answer 5

They must not be lying. I'm sure he does not want to p**s off his dying wife with a little thing like a paternity suit to prove who the daddy is. Guess he screwed the pooch on whatever political career he hoped to salvage.