Noel Clarke - surprised he lost the libel case against The Guardian?

[mumofoneAloneandwell]

I wasn't. I believed Adam Deacon when he said that he was bullied by him.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy33g0lelno.amp

Not at all. How likely is it that, I think, 20 women would independently and separately put themselves through testifying in court if it wasn't true?
His claims that it was a conspiracy by a 'powerful media outlet' are laughable.

No. I always had an uneasy feeling about him.

The female characters in his films are always 'slags,' druggies, purely there to get naked, money crazed or total doormats with no decent lines or character progression.

If that's how he writes women I imagined that's how he must think about them.

No

Omg i watched this film called 'brotherhood' (iirc)

He cheated on his wife with a 'slag', and then cried a bit to her and she took him back - zero questioning or anger at him 😄😄😄

I remember judging him then

Yep. All his women characters are weak, pathetic or just mute and naked.

He really is a wrong 'un.

Several new allegations in the Graun - a detailed report.

Hard agree 🤢🤢

I saw this notificaiton pop up! Need to read

Good, hes really got his comeuppance

A very stupid own goal, but couldn't happen to a more deserving male.

Have had the misfortune to work with him, found him to be a very unpleasant person.

🥺

Do share if you feel comfortable

The thing is, women put up with a lot in that industry (far too much), so it must have been so bad for them to get to this stage

Very, very glad for The Graun. (Phew though….they could ill afford to lose.)
I’ve many a bone to pick with (editor) Katherine Viner these days, but it’s still my paper, and you’d hate to see a lifelong friend trampled by some scrote’s mere fame and ££.
When they put on their Righteous Crusade gear at Grauniad Towers, it’s a very inspiring sight.

Well done those women.

Must be awful for his wife and children.

Gosh yeah, i didnt even think of them tbh

I imagine theyre having to bear the brunt of his anger as well

He's nauseating. On the upside, the case was presided over by an impressive woman, Mrs Justice Steyn. My DH, who is a legal nerd, is a huge fan of her father, Lord Justice Steyn - the apple hasn't fallen far from the tree.

The wife may have been in denial about his antics and now the details are out there for the world to see.

Also, I assume the family is going to take a huge financial hit as he will have to pay The Guardian’s legal costs, won’t he?

It's so reassuring for all the women who spoke out against him. Great to see the judge saying we should believe them.

Also great to see proper, investigative journalism being displayed. The lengths that decent media outlets must go through before publishing claims like this. It's rigorous, as it should be. All those people who really distrust 'mainstream media's should take note. Anyone can say any old shite on social media but this is journalism.

Crumbs, I didn't realise he was married with kids.

I can't imagine living with a serial sex abuser is a walk in the park for her anyway. Let's hope she divorces the revolting man.

I agree but assuming she did divorce him I can't imagine it would be easy to get much child support once he's paid all these legal costs.

This is such a brilliant verdict for the journalist and all the many women who've suffered this man. But as ever there are always going to be innocent people still suffering.

Huge victory for women and journalism, achieved by the guardian's excellent investigation and principled bravery. Good to see how principled they can be in some areas of journalism, despite their abject failure to cover women's rights effectively in relation to trans issues.

This.

👀👀 will Google

Fun fact, i wanted to be a barrister but life got in the way

Now I feel insecure whenever I meet a lawyer, and triggered whenever I see a barrister on tv 🙈

I cant see anything confirming, the articles say he might have to pay them

Apparently he could also appeal but could he really afford to do that, i doubt it

He's be mad to appeal given how unequivocal the judgement was. But then his behaviour and tactics during the trial show he's the type that would. Interesting that the judge did say that they believed that he really didn't think he was hurting anyone and wasn't doing so intentionally, although that doesn't excuse the behaviour. There's a page on the Guardian outlining the key findings in the case where this comes up.

“Even when his actions have been calculated and deliberate, Mr Clarke has tended to be oblivious to their impact, regarding his own behaviour as merely being ‘naughty’, ‘cheeky’, ‘teasing’ or within his rights as a director or producer.