McAlpine wins libel case against Sally Bercow – how did that happen?

mcaberkThe tweet by Sally Berkow (“Why is Lord McAlpine trending *innocent face*) has been ruled libellous at the High Court hearing held today in front of Mr Justice Tugendhat.

Following the ruling, Sally Berkow made the following statement:

“Today the High Court found that my tweet constituted a serious libel, both in its natural meaning and as an innuendo.

“To say I’m surprised and disappointed by this is an understatement. However, I will accept the ruling as the end of the matter.

“I remain sorry for the distress I have caused Lord McAlpine and I repeat my apologies. I have accepted an earlier offer his lawyers made to settle this matter.”

No doubt the ‘earlier offer’ will be a substantial amount to add to the already swelling McAlpine coffers of profit for NOT being named as a paedophile – beats having to work for a living.

We have yet to hear of McAlpine making any donation to charity from the proceeds of his substantial ‘damages’ pay-outs as was allegedly stated by him when he started to threaten to sue everyone for NOT naming him as a paedophile.

If he hasn’t anything better to spend the money on perhaps he would like to bolster his art collection again.

In 2003, McAlpine’s collection of ‘art’ by renowned paedophile and ‘artist’ Graham Ovenden (Daily Mail article on Ovenden) was auctioned by London bookseller ‘Bloomsbury Book Auctions’.

The following article appeared in the Evening Standard on the 23rd May 2003:

‘LONDON BOOKSELLER Bloomsbury Book Auctions is today selling off Lord McAlpine’s former collection of photographs entitled A (Very) Private Collection: Fashion and Eroticism Photographs 1970-1990. For some reason the auctioneers coyly refer to “an historic collection… put together in London… by a well-known but anonymous collector”. Could their coyness have anything to do with the fact that the 344 pictures include 10 snaps of very young girls in very suggestive poses by Graham Ovenden?

“We were aware of the possible intentions in the context of this field but came to the decision that Graham Ovenden’s photos were in no way offensive,” says organiser John Cumming.

My source tells me the ” well known but anonymous collector” is former Conservative Party Treasurer Lord McAlpine, who in 1996 gave his photographic collection to an Australian gallery which in turn sold them on to Bloomsbury Book Auctions.

John Cumming is more circumspect: “We are selling a private collection.”’

If you are not aware of the ‘art’ of Graham Ovenden then do an internet search and judge for yourself whether naked and provocative images (paintings and photographs) of underage girls are something that you would find acceptable in an art collection. We will not include any of the images here.

It seems as though the McAlpine fiasco has been purposely designed to send a clear message to anyone thinking of challenging the ‘upper echelons’ of society and the ‘old boy’s network’ in the UK.

The expression ‘Birds of a feather flock together’ comes immediately to mind.

Follow @martynjsymons


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s