A journalist who investigated allegations of sexual misconduct by Noel Clark was said to be acting out of “moral obligations” to “act in a way that is unacceptable in the future,” the London High Court said yesterday (April 3).
Sirin Kale who worked Guardian In various capabilities since 2017, she said she spoke to over 70 “direct and backside” sources in support of the paper’s claims in various publications on British actor-directed producers.
Clarke is suing Guardian News and Media (GNM), the publisher of papers that contain seven articles and podcasts, including more than seven articles and podcasts.
He denied the allegations and said that several people who made the allegations were part of a conspiracy to slander him, but GNM defends the report as both true and in the public interest.
In her witness statement, Kale said she was the first to contact Paul Lewis’ story, GuardianThe researcher received tip-offs on April 6, 2021 from two sources, which were part of a wider group of seven.
People in the group “were formed as a result of concern over Clark’s conduct or as a result of someone who described himself as a victim of Clark’s own actions,” Kahle said.
Kale continued that “approved the investigation without any particular expectation of publishing the article,” but that the sources seemed “trustworthy.”
She said: “Some of the group of seven had mutual friends and contacts and worked with me, which didn’t attack me as unusual given that I am an expert working in the UK film and television industry.
“I didn’t think of a group of seven as a close friend group.
“These sources told me that Clark was acting out of a sense of moral obligation to prevent him from abusing or harassing other women.
“Therefore, I didn’t recognize the original source as an existing group of friends who wanted to damage Mr. Clark’s reputation.
“In fact, they seemed motivated by their desire to prevent Clark from acting in ways that are unacceptable in the future against other women.”
Kale continued to be connected to further sources, but said, “Many of our sources were hesitant to talk to journalists and were very concerned that their names should not be made public.
“They expressed their fears about Clark and the impact of what they said on their careers.”
Clark was awarded the Honorary BAFTA in 2021 for his outstanding contributions to British films. The award and his BAFTA membership were suspended following the allegations.
During Kale’s cross-examination, the court heard a recording of an appeal with the Philippa Club, one of the women named in a newspaper report.
Philip Williams, who represents Clark, suggested that Kale hopes that Mr. Clark’s buffta will be taken from him.
Kale replied: “I don’t think I wanted his bafta to be taken from him. I wanted to reveal his suspected conduct.”
According to Guardian’s The original report of the trial representing Clark, Williams put Kale in the state that none of Clark’s accusers were black, but she refused to characterize them.
The journalist told the court he spoke to “multiple women” of black or mixed race who disagreed with the names used in the article.
The lawyer later asked if he wanted to “cancel” Clark.
He continued: “You wanted to do as much damage as possible to Clark, were you not Mr. Kale?”
The journalist said: “No, I wanted to publish an article documenting what I felt was a credible allegation from 22 women of fraud.”
The hearing before Judge Steyn is expected to conclude a written decision this month at a later date.
(TagStoTRASSLATE) UK/Ireland
