British actor and filmmaker Noel Clarke has concluded his libel trial against Guardian News and Media (GNM). It was a five week trial, held in Central London complete with weeks of dense, technical testimony. Clarke is currently seeking damages for seven of The Guardian’s articles, as well as one podcast. In his complaint, he claims that these publishing careers have irretrievably destroyed his professional stakes. The trial in front of Justice Steyn began on March 7, 2023. It included hours of witness testimony and presented dueling testimonies and narratives on Clarke’s alleged misconduct.
The storm of protest began after a study made the news in April, 2021. Perhaps the most explosive finding was that 20 women had come forward with allegations of sexual misconduct against Clarke. In the process, the revelations triggered perhaps the loudest backlash to his presidency. In reply, Clarke argued that the news articles have indisputably ruined his current and future employment opportunities.
Witness Testimonies and Claims
During the trial, more than 30 witnesses took to the stand to testify about Clarke’s derogatory claims. Of these, 26 were persons who identified themselves as victims of or witnesses to serious misconduct by Clarke. The cumulative effect of these testimonies created a tremendous hurdle to Clarke’s defense.
In sharp opposition, Clarke’s team brought in character witnesses including his wife, actress Louise Dylan, to vouch for his character. Philip Williams, Clarke’s lawyer, attempted to depict his client as a target of a media witch hunt. He described Clarke as a “scapegoat and an easy target.” He claimed that the media industry sought to atone for the #MeToo movement by targeting powerful individuals such as Clarke.
“A handful of people were plotting and carrying out their scheme from 2019 to bring about Mr Clarke’s downfall, based on vitriolic hatred, professional jealousy, classist snobbery and insidious racialised bias.” – Philip Williams
Williams further criticized GNM’s reporting, claiming it “manifestly failed to do its job properly.” He claimed that the reporters had tainted their sources’ responses by asking suggestive questions. Williams urged the court to recognize the serious harm Clarke has suffered due to the articles and podcast, arguing that they had led to “continuing hostile reactions online and in public discourse.”
The Guardian’s Defense
GNM’s legal team presented a robust defense against Clarke’s claims. Gavin Millar KC, acting for GNM, contended that Clarke acted outside of his powers. He alleged that Clarke had sexually harassed and preyed upon female staffers for 15 years. Millar dismissed Clarke’s claims of conspiracy as “nonsensical and rather desperate speculation.”
Millar highlighted the credibility of The Guardian’s reporting, corroborated by several other eyewitness accounts. He maintained in his closing argument that Clarke had every incentive to fabricate the allegations. If he lost in court, he stood to lose big.
“not a shred of evidence” to support Clarke’s claim of conspiracy – Gavin Millar KC
GNM’s testimony was very deep, very credible – Millar. He vehemently rejected Williams’ claims of retaliation or of weaponizing the investigation. He contended that the teacher complaints posted were not motivated by bad faith, but rather truthfully reflected genuine instances of wrongdoing.
Anticipated Judgment
With the trial now wrapped up, both parties now await a final written judgment from Justice Steyn. The outcome could have profound implications for Clarke’s career and reputation, as well as for the media’s role in reporting allegations of misconduct.
As this notable case has shown, there is a difficult tension between protecting the reputations of individuals accused of wrongdoing and allowing for accountability for alleged misconduct. Public discourse on all of these issues has changed and continues to change very quickly. This trial has become a watershed moment in the discussions surrounding #MeToo, accountability for predators, and the role of media companies.