25 November 1999 Edition
Prentice paid money to LVF leader's wife
by Laura Friel
Portadown businessman Albert Prentice, one of two brothers currently suing the author of ``The Committee'' Sean McPhilemy for libel in the USA, must disclose details of the money he admittedly paid to the wife of his nephew, Mark ``Swinger'' Fulton, a US court has ruled.
Mark Fulton, the reputed leader of the Loyalist Volunteer Force, is currently serving a jail sentence for arms offences. McPhilemy's book names businessmen, members of the RUC, solicitors, members of the UDR and loyalist gunmen who he alleged were members of the ``Committee'', which orchestrated collusion with loyalist death squads.
The Prentice brothers' libel action bill, which has already cost the pair $2 million, is set to increase after a Washington judge ruled in favour of 53 out of 57 discovery demands by McPhilemy's lawyers.
The Prentices are suing for $100 million, but if the court accepts McPhilemy's lawyers' categorisation of the two businessmen as ``public figures'' under US law, the brothers would have to prove that the defendant deliberately published untrue facts about them, knowing them to be lies.
Portadown businessman Albert Prentice, one of two brothers currently suing the author of ``The Committee'' Sean McPhilemy for libel in the USA, must disclose details of the money he admittedly paid to the wife of his nephew, Mark ``Swinger'' Fulton, a US court has ruled.
Mark Fulton, the reputed leader of the Loyalist Volunteer Force, is currently serving a jail sentence for arms offences. McPhilemy's book names businessmen, members of the RUC, solicitors, members of the UDR and loyalist gunmen who he alleged were members of the ``Committee'', which orchestrated collusion with loyalist death squads.
The Prentice brothers' libel action bill, which has already cost the pair $2 million, is set to increase after a Washington judge ruled in favour of 53 out of 57 discovery demands by McPhilemy's lawyers.
The Prentices are suing for $100 million, but if the court accepts McPhilemy's lawyers' categorisation of the two businessmen as ``public figures'' under US law, the brothers would have to prove that the defendant deliberately published untrue facts about them, knowing them to be lies.