Noel Clarke was "cancelled" and faced a "trial by media" after allegations of sexual misconduct were published by The Guardian newspaper, the High Court has heard today.
The Guardian published a report in April 2021 that stated 20 women had come forward with allegations of misconduct involving Clarke. The report contained numerous allegations of bullying and sexual harassment levelled against the actor by the women, who had all known him in a professional capacity.
Clarke strongly denied "any sexual misconduct or criminal wrongdoing" in a statement issued at the time. The statement read: "I vehemently deny any sexual misconduct or criminal wrongdoing. Recent reports however have made it clear to me that some of my actions have affected people in ways I did not intend or realise. To those individuals, I am deeply sorry. I will be seeking professional help to educate myself and change for the better."
Noel Clarke arriving at the Royal Courts of Justice in London earlier today (PA)
The actor claims The Guardian report had a 'devastating impact' on his career (PA)The actor is suing The Guardian over the "devastating" impact its report had on his career. Following the report being published, Clarke claims he lost a £585,000 fee when Sky crime series Bulletproof was dropped, in addition to £270,000 for the ITV drama Viewpoint. The Kidulthood actor and director is also claiming £8.25 million over lost share value and salary from his production company Unstoppable.
The former Doctor Who actor appeared at the High Court today [October 26] for a preliminary hearing in his libel claim against the publisher. Adam Speker KC, for Clarke, said the "overall impression" of the articles was "plainly one of guilt". He told the court in London: "They knew exactly what message they were sending by calling him a sexual predator, in the first two words of the headline."
Noel Clarke satisfied' after ruling in Guardian libel battle
Mr Speker went on to say: "He [Mr Clarke] had had a very distinguished career… then the dam breaks, the women break their silence and they say ‘j’accuse’." Mr Speker said in written submissions: "This trial by media, conducted by the most-read newspaper for people in the film and entertainment industry, led, unsurprisingly, to Mr Clarke being immediately ‘cancelled’ in various ways."
The court was later told the police had decided no criminal investigation would be launched over the sexual offence allegations against Clarke. Scotland Yard said in a statement in March 2022 that there had been a thorough assessment by specialist detectives, but it was determined the information would not meet the threshold for a criminal investigation.
Mr Speker told the court that one of the articles published by The Guardian was about the response of women’s rights activists to this decision. He said: "It does not say that ‘the police have investigated, perhaps we should reconsider whether our investigation hit the right points’… It clearly sends the message that he is guilty and the police were wrong not to investigate. The message that comes out is that he got away with it, he beat the rap."
Clarke's TV credits include several appearances on BBC series Doctor WhoMr Speker later accepted that Mr Clarke’s denials were included, but it "comes nowhere near close" to mitigating the impact of the article. He told the court: "There is nothing he could say and nothing he does say that minimises what the natural and ordinary reader would have taken from the articles: that he is a sexual predator and is guilty of the charges."
Gavin Millar KC, for GNM, said the articles would be read as reporting "reasonable grounds to suspect" Mr Clarke had abused his power, bullied or sexually harassed women, rather than a direct allegation of guilt. He said in written submissions: "The appropriate meaning is therefore a general charge, essentially of abuse of power to subject women to sexual harassment and other related misconduct. In this context, no reasonable reader would assume an allegation is true merely because it has been made.The weight of allegations may support their credibility, but it would still be unreasonable to infer that allegations that are clearly stated to be disputed are true because they have been made by more than one person."
Mr Millar said a normal reader "will not automatically assume that the defendant was adopting or endorsing an allegation by reporting it" but would understand the claims against Mr Clarke were a matter of public interest. The barrister said the first article, which initially reported the allegations by the 20 women, "does not contain allegations of guilt of misconduct".
He continued: "The fact that a piece of writing contains both an allegation of misconduct and a counter-allegation denying the alleged misconduct may well lead the reader to understand that there are grounds to investigate or suspect the claimant of misconduct, rather than that the claimant is actually guilty of anything."
Mr Millar later said that the use of the phrase "sexual predator" was "plainly a comment, and a colloquial one, about the specific conduct referred to". The hearing before Mr Justice Johnson is due to conclude on Thursday with a decision expected at a later date.
In response to Clarke's legal action, The Guardian has previously defended its reporting and says the "investigation was deeply reported and researched, relying on the testimony of 20 women, all of whom knew Noel Clarke in a professional capacity. We stand by our reporting and will be robustly defending our journalism."
* If you've been the victim of sexual assault, you can access help and resources via www.rapecrisis.org.uk or calling the national telephone helpline on 0808 802 9999
Comments:
comments powered by Disqus
