Bercow Guilty Of Libel: It’s War!

I’ve waited before commenting on this case while it was ongoing.

Sally Bercow has been found guilty of libelling Lord McAlpine over her “*innocent face” tweet.

Make absolutely no mistake that this is a direct attack on the freedom of speech on the Internet and social media by ‘the establishment’ who wish to exercise control over information, so they can hide from you their disgusting crimes and complicity.

It’s now war!

So, Lord McAlpine, as your cousin ‘Jimmy’ McAlpine was really the person who was a child abuser, have you talked to the police about your cousin’s child abusing ? How long have you known that your cousin was a child abuser ?

Lord McAlpine, can you tell the public about your interest in Graham Ovenden’s so called art, specifically your interest in the works of a man who has been found guilty of child abuse and used his fascination with underage girls that he abused as the inspiration for his art ?

17 Comments

Filed under Abuse, News, Politics

17 responses to “Bercow Guilty Of Libel: It’s War!

  1. Loverat

    Some statistics for you:

    In 2010 81% of libel defendants won their cases.

    In 2013 – 100% of Tory claimants win their libel cases in the lower court presided over by Tugendhat J.

    However, most overturned at appeal:

    Waterson v Lloyd – former conservative MP (overturned)
    McAlpine v Bercow – conservative peer (decision wrong in law – not appealed)
    Cruddas v Sunday Times former conservative minister (partially overturned)

    Interesting that the judge’s brother is tory too. I wonder if anyone has noticed this worrying trend. No wonder the Sunday Times asked that the judge be taken off the case.

  2. Loverat

    I think the point people also need to think about is why the decison yesterday departs from well established legal guidance and precedent.

    It is well known that in multiple libel cases involving several defendants that you cannot reasonably demand or be awarded compensation on a case by case basis. All tweets/posts/broadcasts need to be considered together to avoid the danger of overcompensation.

    The way this case has been managed conveniently avoided having to address this crucial consideration. Instead the judge has held a separate hearing to study the meaning and that is the end of the case. In my view this litigation has been put in a strait-jacket to avoid the difficulty of having to apportion fair liability to Sally Bercow.

    Answer this – let’s assume that the tweet was defamatory for one moment. Considering that the top libel award ever is £250,000 and Sally Bercow’s contribution was seven words written amongst thousands of others by thousands of people and of course in the background of the broadcasts and other coverage – how much in compensation should she have been held liable for? And then add to that the £310,000 plus damages received by McAlpine for the same allegations and then answer the question again.

    If you think in the context of the totality of the publications (which a judge would normally consider, except curiously not so in this case) that the compensaton for her involvement should be £5,000 (I think that is generous) what decision should be reached considering the cost of the litigation was probably over £100,000? And then consider that she is reported to have made an offer previously which in my view is likely to be equal or more that 5k, what decision would you reach?

    Why did the judge say that he did not know or want to know how much Sally Bercow had offered? Surely this was crucial regardless of the meaning of the tweet. Why did the judge depart from or ignore clear guidance which he himself endorsed in a previous internet libel case 3 years ago? Why did he dismiss other cases in favour of the defendant some of which involved defamatory allegations, as an abuse of process (litigation more costly than any likely award) and yet did not do the same here?

    And what stops McAlpine and other libel litigations engaging in ‘speculative invoicing’ practices and targetting hundreds of others to pay disproportionate amounts of compensation for the same allegations? The judge clearly got this completely wrong. I wonder what the defence team for Sally Bercow have to say. Judging by some of the comments I am seeing in the legal community it appears Sally Bercow has been hung to dry and there is no wish for them to dwell on this shocking and appalling episode.

  3. dpack

    umm,business as usual then.
    time to gather the allies and put the tactical gloves on.
    there are proven facts that provide overwhelming evidence of widespread organized and individual evil doing,there is evidence of some inquiries into these matters being stopped at an early stage or their findings suppressed or their being organised in such a way as the full facts are hidden under a mass of part truths and omissions.
    there is proof of records and evidence being destroyed or “lost”.

    for example

    some open questions to mr leon brittan .

    an account your actions regarding the dossier of serious allegations implicating various people and groups in child abuse that mr dickens presented to you would be helpful in establishing the truth,will you assist in this?
    once you had been made aware of the contents by mr dickens and given a copy who did you ask for advice as to the veracity of the information ?
    if you were informed the information was correct why were no criminals brought to justice ?
    if you were informed the information was not true why did you not report that to mr dickens,the forces of law and the public in order to assist in clearing any persons wrongfully accused ?
    what did you do with the paper copy of the dossier handed to you by mr dickens?
    with whom did you discuss it ?
    did you or others make copies?
    the answers to these questions may lead to subsequent questions,will you help with clarifying issues raised by your answers?

  4. gus brown

    It is heartening to read your blog and the other comments. I was begining to despair reading the “serves her right, glad she lost” comments on some of the other sites.
    It is a threat and an attempt at intimidation and I’m glad it has resulted in a declaration of war. Good.

    • Tom

      Quite agree. But I suspect the comments on the newspapers’ sites are the only ones they chose to show, not a representation of the public’s view. The newspapers have been brown-nosing to McAlpine from the start, and they probably like the idea of a clampdown on the internet to try to halt their plummeting sales.

  5. Reblogged this on Bishop Brightly and commented:
    War it is.

  6. Claire

    Judge Tugendhat’s brother was a Tory MP under Thatcher. Surely a case for bias? He was also a Jersey judge at one time.

    • I apologise for remaining anonymous for the time being .I am the source of Tom Watson's PMQ on 24th Oct

      20 years ago I worked very closely with very experienced and skilled police officers in the Met Police’s Obscene Publications Squad. They decided then that Graham Ovenden’s work was child pornography ( totally the wrong label. It’s straightforward child sexual exploitation and abuse )
      It took a further 20 years of total commitment and perseverence for the police to get past the barriers put up by previous judges( who threw out the case)
      and high profile and powerful Ovenden establishment allies before a conviction and confirmation that he was a paedophile was secured
      To buy a selection of his work puts you in a certain category of person
      In the world I live in believing in the sanctity of an innocent childhood and child protection as a paramount consideration anyone with an ounce of normality in them wouldn’t have had to wait for a 2013 decision to define what is child pornography
      So an avid collector of such works for me puts you in a certain light
      20 years ago Lord Mcalpine wrote an extraordinary bizarre book which implied he had a long term plan to entrap false accusers
      It was bound to succeed when he allowed rumours to remain on the Internet for 20 years from early Scallywag accusations to the Newsnight programme last year
      Why isn’t Lord Mcalpine facing issues of entrapment and procurement by his very own hand
      Innocent victims were bound to fall in to his trap
      Did sally bercow put this argument forward does anyone know
      Where is public opinion on this
      Why hasn ‘t Ovenden been sentenced yet

      • Claire

        You are so right, the stink emanates from up high. The old boys network STILL has a stranglehold on justice.
        I would be keen to know what argument Bercow put forward exactly too, but I expect she has been bulldozed into defeat, hence her accepting and defeatist attitude after court. She should have cited Scallwag and Icke.
        McAlpine has been named by Scallywag and David Icke for years now, yet no libel case has headed their way. Can you pick and choose who is libelling you now, regardless of the realities and consensus in print? It definitely seems like one law for some, another for the rest. Where IS the sentencing for Ovendon?
        Another thing I thank you for reminding us, that there are still some dedicated police with integrity who unfortunately feel they are also battling the system.

  7. nuggy

    she at best implied it while other people actually said it why arnt they being sued.

  8. Spot on mate. I will be going full out now. Gloves off, fact out time for everyone. Awful judgement. The establishments last desperate attempt to use chilling effect to stifle the truth.

  9. Mr Alpine has got it coming to him, give it time! The monkey is on the way down. Money or no money.

  10. Barry Richards

    Paedophiles will always close ranks. Hang em all. It won’t stop new ones coming along, maybe. So what. It’ll stop the dirty bastards doing it ever again.

  11. godhelpus

    Let the War Begin!!! things have got to change in this Country. Being in Fear to speak your Mind, What Next?????

  12. TinaLBee

    Well said Gojam!! We all have to stand up and be counted and not allow the establishment to hide behind their privelege. Thats why its gone on for so long.

  13. Chris G

    I’ve been at War with Child Abusers and those that cover and support them for some 35years Plus, and will until the Day I Die . It Should be all Out War ! Lets Get Them all.
    A few seconds ago · Like · Reply

  14. Pingback: Bercow Guilty Of Libel: It’s War! » Alternative News Network