Importance Score: 65 / 100 🔴
Guardian Journalist Defends Noel Clarke Investigation Amid Libel Case
A journalist for The Guardian has stated that there was “no hidden agenda” in the publication’s investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct against actor Noel Clarke. The High Court heard this as the newspaper defends its reporting against a libel claim.
Lucy Osborne, an investigative correspondent at The Guardian, took the stand for a second day, defending the outlet’s reporting. She faced questioning from Philip Williams, the barrister representing the former Doctor Who actor.
No Conspiracy or Inconsistencies, Journalist Asserts
Osborne, who co-authored the investigation prompting the libel claim from the actor, refuted Williams’s suggestions. She denied there were “significant discrepancies” in the testimonies of alleged victims or that a plot existed to discredit Clarke.
She testified that any concerns regarding the credibility of the allegations would have been immediately brought to the attention of Paul Lewis, The Guardian’s head of investigations.
“There was absolutely no agenda,” Osborne affirmed to the court. “We undertook a meticulous inquiry, and had I, at any juncture, harbored doubts about the reliability of these claims or any unease concerning any of the sources, I would have escalated it to Paul. Publishing would not have been an option under such circumstances.”
Osborne emphasized maintaining impartiality throughout the process and collecting information from a wide array of sources – too numerous to detail in her witness statement.
“Publishing prematurely is certainly not in my interest,” Osborne told the court, highlighting the importance of thoroughness.
Cross-Examination Focuses on Alleged Victims’ Conduct
Williams directed his cross-examination towards specific behaviors of individuals alleging misconduct, suggesting these should have raised “red flags” for Osborne. This included questioning regarding Gina Powell, a former colleague of Clarke’s at his production company, Unstoppable Productions, who alleges sexual assault and abusive conduct.
Williams contended that a deeper investigation would have revealed that Powell allegedly made “sexually suggestive remarks” and sent pornographic material to Clarke.
The journalist countered, stating: “Gina informed me at an early stage, unprompted, about the sexually charged environment she experienced while working with Noel. She felt pressured and described a culture, spearheaded by Mr. Clarke, that was highly sexualized, with an expectation for her to reciprocate in a similar manner of speaking.”
Osborne described Powell as a “remarkably resilient and inspiring woman” for coming forward with her account.
Minidress and Intoxication Irrelevant to Allegations, Journalist Argues
Williams also questioned Osborne about another witness, identified as Evelyn (pseudonym), who alleges Clarke photographed her underwear while she was dancing and attempted to show it to colleagues. Williams pointed out that Evelyn was reportedly wearing a minidress at the time.
“I fail to see the relevance of her attire, whether a minidress or otherwise,” Osborne responded. “The core allegation is that Mr. Clarke surreptitiously photographed her undergarments at close range.”
Further, when Williams raised the issue of Evelyn’s possible intoxication, Osborne dismissed it as inconsequential to the validity of her allegations against Clarke.