For other types of media
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
By Fozzy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#420163
He's just lost his libel case - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33477004" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . The judge found that he lied, and that his victim told the truth when she said he groped her when she was 15 years old. So in effect he has announced to the world that he is a child abuser and a perjurer.

I find it near-impossible to believe that his agents and his lawyers failed to tell him in no uncertain terms that only an idiot would sue for libel in this case. But then, he is a Grade A steaming idiot. And an arsehole.
 
By Safe_Timber_Man
Membership Days Posts
#420170
The Mail will be pissed off about this, Littlejohn especially. Starr has been one of their 'See, it IS a witch hunt' examples, if I remember rightly. Still, this won't change their view. In fact, I forsee an article attacking the system in the very near future.

The Mailites aren't having it, either. A lot of them don't appear to have even read it.
OldBob, Chalfont St Peter, 5 hours ago
Shame really - it seems people can easily destroy a persons reputation and there is absolutely no comeback or sanction if it turns out to be not proven.
+331 -87
Batmun, Worcester, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
The BBC has shown in this case that it still remains a massive influence on the paedophile activity it has allowed in its own studios over the years. Shame on it I fully support the so called war on the BBC. They are a disgrace
+172 -34
By Fozzy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#420178
Yes, there's an amazing number of commenters who seem to think it is Starr who is being persecuted and that he was the one being sued. They also seem to think it is some sort of conclusive proof of innocence that the CPS didn't prosecute, as opposed to a decision that they didn't think they had enough evidence to prove it beyond reasonable doubt. I suppose it's no surprise that Starr's supporters are as thick as he is.
 
By youngian
Membership Days Posts
#420183
Ms Ward, 56, alleges that the assault took place in 1974 behind the scenes of Jimmy Savile's Clunk Click TV show.
This is not a good a start is it Freddie.
Fozzy wrote: I find it near-impossible to believe that his agents and his lawyers failed to tell him in no uncertain terms that only an idiot would sue for libel in this case. But then, he is a Grade A steaming idiot. And an arsehole.
Mr Starr said he did not at first remember appearing on Clunk Click in March 1974, until footage showed him in the studio with teenage Ms Ward behind him.
I'm prepared to believe that, but its not helping his case is it.
By satnav
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#420220
It really does look like one of the most pointless legal actions ever. Even if he had won the case the defendant would not have had the means to pay him any compensation. All the case seems to have done is remind the public what a complete tool Starr has been in the past.
 
By Daley Mayle
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#420232
satnav wrote:It really does look like one of the most pointless legal actions ever. Even if he had won the case the defendant would not have had the means to pay him any compensation. All the case seems to have done is remind the public what a complete tool Starr has been in the past.
How soon they forget! What about William Roach aka Ken Barlow taking The Sun to court for libel in 1991 after the paper described him as boring? He was offered £50k by The Sun before the court case started and he refused the offer. It went to trial and the jury did indeed agree it was libel (their idea of a boredom threshold must have been different to mine) and awarded him, er £50k, but not the costs that amounted to £120k and this bankrupted him.
Jeremy Corbyn.

This is quite interesting. It is one of the more c[…]

Sad Faces in Local Papers

Northern Irish local newspapers are generally quit[…]

If.

The Northern Irish thread

https://twitter.com/wee_baldy_ian/status/116487823[…]