Tabloid Nazi Sex Suit Won By Racing Boss

Max Mosley, Owner Of Formula One Sued The News Of The World For Invading Privacy And Defaming Character

(AP)  After the sting of scandal, Max Mosley can feel the balm of victory.

A British judge ruled Thursday that a tabloid newspaper breached the motorsport chief's privacy with a story claiming that a sadomasochistic orgy he took part in had a Nazi theme. The News of the World faces a legal bill of almost $2 million after the judge ordered it to pay damages and Mosley's legal costs, as well as its own.

Mosley said the ruling proves that his now-famous interest in sadomasochism is a purely private matter. But some legal experts doubt the financial blow to the newspaper will be large enough to deter the prying of Britain's scandal-hungry tabloid press.

High Court judge David Eady ruled that Mosley, president of the governing body that oversees Formula One racing, "had a reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to sexual activities (albeit unconventional) carried on between consenting adults on private property."

The judge said he had found no evidence that Mosley's role-playing encounter with five women "was intended to be an enactment of Nazi behavior or adoption of any of its attitudes."

"There was bondage, beating and domination, which seem to be typical of S&M behavior," Eady said.

Mosley's fondness for caning and spanking has become public knowledge since the News of the World ran a story in March giving details of his encounters with five dominatrices in a basement flat in London.

Video footage, secretly filmed by one of the women, has been viewed millions of times on the Internet, and extracts were played during Mosley's weeklong court hearing against the newspaper this month.

The newspaper claimed one session in March had a Nazi theme — an especially explosive allegation because Mosley is the son of the late Oswald Mosley, Britain's leading fascist politician in the 1930s and a friend of Adolf Hitler.

Some of the participants wore striped prison-style uniforms and one dominatrix wore a German Luftwaffe jacket.

Mosley told the court he had an interest in sadomasochism going back 45 years, but said he found the idea of Nazi sex fantasies abhorrent. He said he and the women acted out a German prison scenario, with no Nazi overtones.

Mosley, 68, said the ruling exposed "the Nazi lie upon which the News of the World sought to justify their disgraceful intrusion into my private life."

"I hope my case will help deter newspapers in the U.K. from pursuing this type of invasive and salacious journalism," he said.

Some lawyers considered that unlikely, even though the News of the World now faces a hefty bill. Mosley's legal costs are estimated at about $900,000, the paper's own legal costs at $800,000 and it also must pay Mosley $120,000 in damages.

The payout is large for a British privacy lawsuit. But the judge did not award the "punitive and exemplary" damages Mosley had sought to deter other newspapers from running similar stories.

Eady made a point of saying there was nothing to suggest a "landmark" in his ruling.

"I don't think this is enough to have a chilling effect on the media," said Caroline Kean, a partner at media-law specialists Wiggin. "Sixty thousand pounds is nothing like the amount that could be awarded, and not approaching the top level of libel damages."

Britain has no formal privacy law, but it is a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the right to respect for privacy and family life. Celebrities have increasingly used this clause to fight media exposes.

Kean said the Mosley ruling underscored the fact "that your sex life is private."

Mosley told the court his wife of 48 years had not known about his S&M activities and said the story had devastated his family.

It also brought calls for him to quit as president of the Federation Internationale de l'Automobile. Despite the pressure, he won a confidence vote last month allowing him to stay until his fourth term ends in October 2009.

News of the World Editor Colin Myler said the paper's story had been "legitimate and lawful" because Mosley was a public figure in a position of authority. He said the judge's ruling had harmed press freedom.

"It is not for the rich and the famous, the powerful and the influential, to dictate the news agenda, just because they have the money and the means to gag a free press," Myler said. "That is why the News of the World will remain committed to fighting for its readers' right to know."

The judge said the newspaper's account of S&M encounters did not amount to a worthy journalistic expose.

"Although no doubt interesting to the public, was this genuinely a matter of public interest?" Eady wrote. "I rather doubt it."

[arnldmartin]

The right move for the judge!Privacy is privacy and we all are entitled to it,Rich or Poor!

[nojoy01]

S-o-o-o. I don''t get it. What ever in the world made somebody think the original story was a ''newsworthy'' event in the first place? I mean, as long as everybody involved is/was a consenting adult AND a member of the human race, who cares who did what with which and to whom?? Seems to me like this is a classic example of the "nunya" concept. As in "none of your business".

[nojoy01]

I hate this guy not because of the Nazi theme, but because he has for years been a disgraceful misogynist. There''''s a *** good reason he has to pay for ***, he''''s a slimy loser and his wife can''''t stand him, despite his millions. I wish he''''d crawl back under his rock so F-1 can become respectable again.

Posted by diatreme at 02:13 PM : Jul 24, 2008

diatreme, I don''t know if you''re red, blue,or magenta.
And I am NOT knocking your post. It''s your opinion, you have a right to it, and I agree w/a lot of it. BUT, I am using your post to point out to a lot of our fellow posters (postees?)who seem to think the current occupants of the white house are evil incarnate to say one thing. That statement pretty much defines what the supporters of the current president thought about our former president. Although I think that probably the man did not have to purchase anything. What am I saying?, neither the current president or the former president is/are evil. They both, however, did the job as they see/saw best and a lot of people on the fringes (fringenatics?) acted/are acting like spoiled children because it''s not what they want done.
(sigh) I don''t really know why I keep trying to speak reasonably of unreasonable things, expect perhaps, that I just may be an idealist.

[newtagagain]

The News of the World likes to think it''s a legitimate news source, however, in reality, it is barely above National Enquirer status. I forget how many times it has succesfully been sued for libel but I assure you this is not the first.

[newtagagain]

"The News of the World faces a legal bill of almost $2 million after the judge ordered it to pay damages and Mosley''s legal costs, as well as its own."

This is where British tort law is way ahead of the American version. In Britain the loser winds up paying all costs - not here. Just this one change would eliminate all frivolous law-suits because it won''t be cheaper "to just settle" as so many defendants do to avoid court costs.

[bradosol]

We badly need a privacy law here in Britain to help clarify a very confused situation.
Otherwise, we''ll go on having court cases which only really benefit the lawyers.
It''s true the News of the World is a sensationalist rag and their stated justification for running the Mosley story was hypocritical rubbish.
Yet there are other newspaper, magazine and book publishers who are neither sensationalist nor confident about what they can legally publish.
Yesterday''s court judgement has made the situation more, not less, confused.
But I have no illusions. Our parliament hasn''t yet shown the courage or inclination to tackle this highly contentious subject. The drafting of a law will be very difficult!