This case has ramifications for men falsely accused of crimes in the UK. Press cannot now report until someone is charged. Sir Cliff Richard is awarded £210,000 damages as judge rules BBC infringed his privacy in a 'serious and sensationalist way'.

Consilio_et_Animis · 2018-07-18T10:51:45+00:00

"The corporation's Director of News Fran Unsworth said: 'It means police investigations, and searches of people's homes, could go unreported and unscrutinised.'"

er.. "unscrutinised" by who exactly? You mean unscrutinised by the man-hating BBC and most of the rest of the UK press infiltrated by feminist ideology — where the "...victim must always be believed" mentality rules.

Exhibit A: BBC Director of News Fran Unsworth

If a suspect is investigated or their home is search, they are totally at liberty to publicise the situation if they feel it needs "scrutinising".

furchfur · 2018-07-18T11:27:28+00:00

More on the case:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44871799

So the BBC plans to appeal and are crying into their tea. They claim:

"But, she said, the case marked a "significant shift" against press freedom and an "important principle" around the public's right to know was at stake. "

They can no longer vilify innocent men! That is their main gripe.

azazelcrowley · 2018-07-18T14:35:42+00:00

Crucial to the case is that it's a privacy violation ruling, not a libel/slander ruling, and so credibility of the claim is irrelevant, it also means it's a human rights violation. This also means that feminists have, once again, spent years committing human rights violations that we criticized, and once again courts have come down in our favor on the topic.

jfartster · 2018-07-18T11:55:46+00:00

Glad to read this. Because I remember when it happened. It was shocking, the extent to which they barged their way in and publicly humiliated the guy. Based on nothing of substance, as it turns out.

So I think this is good. At least the system compensated him to some degree. Because if it didn't, that would be a very worrying precedent to have set - that broadcasted raids, set up like this, are acceptable.

Wisemanner · 2018-07-18T10:15:26+00:00

Yes, very good news.

Good-Boi · 2018-07-18T15:59:05+00:00

People whining about "censoring the press!" need to stop crying, this is about preventing an innocent persons life being ruined by sensationalist media. I hope the BBC is forced to pay this amount and their appeal is shoved up their crumpet hole

smokebowlington · 2018-07-18T12:19:15+00:00

Seems like the law doing it s job, for a change.

thrway_1000 · 2018-07-18T15:11:53+00:00

Since these corporations are pushing a narrative, using peoples lives, they should pay.

Archive -- https://archive.is/djGDl

elebrin · 2018-07-18T15:20:42+00:00

When they say, "can't report," what exactly do they mean?

I don't like limits on free speech or the press. I would prefer that people who are found not guilty who have had their name published before being charged can be assumed to have taken financial damages from such, and the media outlet in question is liable for those.

Imnotmrabut · 2018-07-18T12:58:22+00:00

The BBC have to appeal.... The legal bills are about £5 million in total. Sir Cliff's bills are reported as over £2.4 mil alone.

Zeoniic · 2018-07-18T14:31:59+00:00

The BBC is charged... so we (British) pay the fine?

drinksilpop · 2018-07-18T11:00:44+00:00

I have mixed feelings. The court doesn't name in documents until guilty, which I thought was awesome. This may have been great at another time, but considering how they censor the media, prosecute for facebook posts, and control what news is published, I think it is scary.

guillemqv · 2018-07-18T12:51:36+00:00

Nice.

TobiaF · 2018-07-18T14:16:33+00:00

This is great news and a very important precedent, don't misunderstand me.

Still, I'm just chuckling at "High Court judge Mr Justice Mann"

notacrackheadofficer · 2018-07-18T16:08:09+00:00

Europeans might be shocked, but almost no one in the US knows who he is. He had one minor hit in the 80s here, but Cliff and the Shadows are fully unknown and were never played on any radio stations here, ever, except obscure college stations, and even then almost never. Hilariously, in the US, everyone is told that the Beatles invented the idea of a band writing their own music. Johnny Kidd and the Pirates are also 100% unheard of in the US. Europeans might find it odd, but no one who is American has any idea what I am talking about.

Comments