Today : Feb 24, 2025
U.S. News
30 January 2025

Noel Clarke Loses Bid To Strike Out Guardian Libel Defense

Actor Noel Clarke's legal battle against The Guardian continues as court rules against his application to dismiss the publisher's defense.

Actor Noel Clarke has lost his bid to strike out the defense of The Guardian's publishers in his libel claim against the newspaper, as the High Court prepares for the case to proceed to trial. The legal proceedings, which have drawn considerable public interest, stem from a series of articles published by Guardian News and Media (GNM) beginning with investigative reports in April 2021.

Clarke, known for his roles in Kidulthood and Doctor Who, is suing The Guardian over allegations made by approximately 20 women who claimed to have known him professionally. These allegations range from inappropriate behavior to more serious claims of sexual misconduct. During the latest court hearing on January 29, 2025, Clarke was present, dressed in a grey suit with dark-rimmed glasses, and he maintained his vehement denial of any wrongdoing.

The trial is set to take place next month, and it's shaping up to be contentious, with Clarke's legal team arguing for the defense's case to be struck out. Philip Williams, representing Clarke, submitted written arguments asserting there was strong evidence of attempts to 'pervert the course of justice' related to GNM's actions.

Williams alleged glaring instances of what he characterized as misconduct, including the purported deliberate deletion of personal correspondence between the journalists who had covered Clarke's case. He pointed to specific messages exchanged on encrypted platforms like Signal, which included directives to delete entire threads, potentially threatening the integrity of evidence and sparking claims of fabricated evidence.

One troubling message reportedly indicated, "Delete this entire thread. I'll create a new thread which will likely be disclosable in court." Williams argued this insinuates intent to manipulate evidence and undermine the fairness of any subsequent trial.

During the hearing, Williams described these alleged actions as part of a broader strategy to destroy evidence, which he claimed was "widespread and wholesale." He argued, "The crux of the strike-out application is whether there had been perversion of the course of justice, or spoliation of evidence which renders a fair trial impossible."

Conversely, Gavin Millar, legal counsel for GNM, described Clarke's application to strike out the defense as unjustified and opportunistic. Millar asserted there is no substantial evidence to support Clarke's claims about fabricated evidence and the attempt to undermine GNM's right to defend themselves through the trial. He stated, "There is no evidence either, the evidence was 'fabricated,'" adding it was inappropriate for Clarke to smear the reputation of the journalists without valid justification.

During the hearing, evidence presented by GNM included claims from one of the women who alleged Clarke had sent her unsolicited explicit photographs, which Clarke's team contested based on chronological discrepancies discovered within the evidence. Williams pointed out the image was dated May 15, 2015, yet the woman did not meet Clarke until the following month, rendering the timestamp problematic for the Guardian’s case.

Millar expressed regret about the nature of the proceedings and remarked, "Today, the judge rejected Noel Clarke's application to strike out our defense." Following Millar’s statement, the court noted there was no substantial backing for any of the allegations pointing to malicious intent by The Guardian's journalistic team.

A spokesperson for The Guardian addressed Clarke’s claims, emphasizing the integrity and diligence with which their reporting was carried out, based on the testimonies from numerous women voicing their experiences. The spokesperson stated, "Our reporting on Noel Clarke was based on the accounts of 20 brave women. After we published our first article, more women came forward. At trial, 32 witnesses are set to testify against Mr. Clarke under oath. We look forward to a judge hearing the evidence."

Since the initial allegations surfaced, Clarke's reputation has faced severe scrutiny, leading to the suspension of his BAFTA membership and the severing of ties with several TV channels. Despite the gravity of the accusations, Scotland Yard noted after evaluating all available information, they did not find sufficient grounds to initiate a criminal investigation against Clarke.

This case not only has significant ramifications for Clarke's career and future, but it also raises pressing questions about media ethics and the responsibilities of reporting on allegations of misconduct. With the expectation of the full trial beginning next month, all eyes will remain on the proceedings as they unravel the flood of allegations and the responses from both Clarke and the parties involved.