However, somehow this editor knew about the lawsuit 12 days before it was announced publicly and updated the page in the early morning of September 22, the very day the lawsuit was filed.
I believe that Wikipedia updates register as UTC-1:00. If so, that means the update occurred at 2:48am Arizona time where the lawsuit was filed. The Pima County Superior Court does not even open until 8:00am.
However, somehow this editor knew about the lawsuit 12 days before it was announced publicly and updated the page in the early morning of September 22, the very day the lawsuit was filed.
I believe that Wikipedia updates register as UTC-1:00. If so, that means the update occurred at 2:48am Arizona time where the lawsuit was filed. The Pima County Superior Court does not even open until 8:00am.
I used to be a fan of Camille Herron. But, Canadian Running Magazine publishes a lot of great articles that even a cheapskate like me that doesn't subscribe is able to access. Why would a professional runner sue a running publication? More specifically, I am skeptical that there is any merit to her claims. Since Camille posted about the lawsuit, and apparently likely changed her Wikipedia entry as part of her legal strategy, I think it is disappointing that she wouldn't summarize her claim. Has anyone paid $10 to access her claim?
Honestly, and again as a former fan, I feel like the lawsuit may just be a shake down attempt to get a settlement from the publisher. If this is the case, Camille is certainly asking for more Publix criticism and is making it clear she doesn't want to even try to make any more money as a professional runner.
Camille's website post:
Tucson, AZ — October 4, 2025 — I’ve filed a defamation lawsuit in Pima County Superior Court, Arizona, against Gripped Publishing Inc., publisher of Canadian Running Magazine (Case No. C20256592). The complaint was filed on September 22, 2025. The full complaint is part of the public record and can be accessed through the Arizona eAccess Portal (account setup required, $10 per document): https://eaccess.azcourts.gov Note: I’m Autistic/ADHD, and transparency, clarity, and truth are central to who I am. I’m sharing this in good faith to provide public clarity about this matter.
What I don't get is how she has so many enablers surrounding her. Her husband, family, friends are basically in on this. You'd think at least one person would speak out and attempt to put a stop to this.
Not sure what they think they can get out of this. This is probably a last ditch effort to get some money since all the sponsorship has dried up for obvious reasons.
it's actually hilarious what she posted on her website. It says nothing about the actual reason for the lawsuit, but links that users can request the text for $10. The $10 doesn't even go to her... it's $10 to the AZ court system. So why wouldn't you just describe the lawsuit, Camille?
Good thing she posted an autism warning on her page.
This reminds me of the Family Guy episode where Peter finds out that he technically meets the definition for being mentally challenged, and starts using it as his excuse for doing whatever he wants.
She's basically acting like a jackass, announcing "sorry, I'm autistic," and expecting everyone to say "oh, bless her heart."
Good thing she posted an autism warning on her page.
This reminds me of the Family Guy episode where Peter finds out that he technically meets the definition for being mentally challenged, and starts using it as his excuse for doing whatever he wants.
She's basically acting like a jackass, announcing "sorry, I'm autistic," and expecting everyone to say "oh, bless her heart."
While I don’t entirely disagree with this, I’m hoping they sue the pants of that commie magazine and reporter for sensationalizing the editing of BS on Wikipedia 👍🏼👍🏼. She got canceled for breaking the (seriously flawed) terms of a seriously flawed website. Lol
The woman is delusional. I followed her on social media for a long time, until I realized that nothing is ever her fault. She never takes responsibility for anything. If anyone questioned her rationale she promptly blocked them. This lawsuit is just another example.