Another Out-Of-Court Bailout? McAlpine to seek larger ITV payout, possibly 500K

21st Century Wire says: Too scared to Tweet for fear of another McLibel? First the license paying public get slapped with a snap payout to McAlpine – even though the BBC never actually libeled the man – so what is the technical basis for the payout again? Will we ever know? Tip of the cap, eh. Now ITV are queuing up to make a contribute to the cause, say GBP 500,000? What? Did ITV also libel McAlpine? It’s highly debatable and the public will be interested to see what happens here. Is this just another out-of-court bailout – for the those who don’t need bailing out? This is eerily similar to another recent payout (what will be the total damages collected by the time it’s all said and done?) for a certain set of topless photos published in French magazine CLOSER  – arguably a PR stunt which some folks out there have said bares all the hallmarks of a ‘set-up’ right from the beginning. Keep and eye on this one – and that other one…

‘Scholfield’s List’ – did anyone actually see it?

The Sun

LAWYERS for Lord McAlpine are seeking a larger payout from ITV than the £185,000 they received from the BBC last week, they have confirmed.

The former Tory’s legal team said today it is looking to get a bigger figure from This Morning, which is thought to have until this afternoon to respond to demands.

The channel sparked fury after presenter Phillip Schofield brandished a list of names of alleged abusers which he had found on the internet and handed it to the Prime Minister during a live interview, asking if he would investigate them.

Ofcom has also launched an investigation into the incident, while ITV said that disciplinary action had been taken.

The broadcaster has been contacted by Lord McAlpine’s lawyers, and is expected to have to respond by the end of today.

Reports today claimed that ITV could be forced to pay out up to £500,000 in damages.

An ITV spokesman said: “We have received correspondence from Lord McAlpine’s representatives and we will be responding in due course.”

ITV is the second name in a long list of organisations and individuals who wrongly linked Lord McAlpine to a paedophile ring.

Action is also being prepared against a large number of Twitter users – including Sally Bercow, the wife of the Commons Speaker – who identified the peer in connection with the false sex abuse claims…

Read more


Tags: , , ,

10 Responses to “Another Out-Of-Court Bailout? McAlpine to seek larger ITV payout, possibly 500K”

  1. Em Says:

    Of course, the idea that he would get any more than £250k in court is highly dubious since he was never even named and you couldn’t even read the THIS MORNING printed capitals on the back of the card.

    Very few who did have sympathy for mcalpine do now.

    This is about turning the attention away from child abuse and sowing doubt about the victims.

  2. Em Says:

    Also, how is it possibly right that taxpayers money from the BBC is being given (in the order of £100k) to go after people on twitter.

    and why the hell isn’t he suing icke?!

  3. Carl Jones Says:

    He won`t sue Icke, because Icke knows alot more than he lets on. Its one thing to states things on your site or during lectures which have been out there for some time and stated by many others. Take Icke`s assertion that Royals are lizzards…the MSM has repeated this globally for decades. Icke wrote an article saying the Isle of White was a drugs gateway aided by the authorities and local Freemasons…no one has sued Icke. The majority of Twitter users will say sorry and or pay up, The two Twitter celebs will act on their legal advice. My advice is that everyone should go to court and in each and every case, call HIM to the stand. He`s an old man with a dicky ticker. If he wants to play hard, then treat him hard!!

    You`ve got to remember, Lord McAlpine was part of one of the worst UK governments in history. He was a political monster of his age, so don`t get soft, just because he`s an old man.

    Apart from his theories, I`d say that Icke only releases a fraction of what he knows. While most of this can`t be supported by fact, he could ask a lot of very difficult questions.

    As I have already said on this forum. Lord McAlpine has put himself in a difficult position if he were to be cross examined, because he has chosen to state that “he only went to Wrexham once and that he never visited any of the North Wales boys homes”….why does he need to state this? Why does he believe that by stating this, it somehow proves his innocence (not that I imply his guilt)??

    All I am doing is questioning Lord McAlpine`s own choice of words and what he believes to be good spin…because he is a master of spin…bending the truth to creat new false realities, as pointed out in articles on this site.

    The BBC blood money and the possible forced ITV settlement is a defensive wall. As we all know, neither has libled him, yet both are really protecing him and those that might also come under police investigation…LOL

    Most people don`t bang in the Google search “elite paedophile names”. But what if Schofield had just said to Cameron “would you be interesed in a list of elite paedopiles”? No doubt Cameron would give some wishy washy answer and then Schofield turns to another camera (close up) and says “go on Google and search XYZ (no actual names) and you to can see the names”!! Now this is less libelous, but actually far more damaging to the elite and the people they seek to protect.

    So no possiblity of libel, acting in the public interest and Schofield would probably have been sacked. Schofield decided to be polite and sincere to the PM and did the right thing. If you had evidence that some employees from the factory over the road from where you live were messing about with the local school children and you offered it the MANAGER and he said “take it to the police” and dropped the evidence on the ground (ITV table)….YOU`D BE VERY RIGHT TO BE CONCERNED, IN FACT, SHOCKED!! Especially when you and the MANAGER knows that the police can`t be trusted!! This is the really shocking thing…Cameron`s reaction to Schofield and his rejection of his legal responsibilities as leader of the Tory party and Prime Minister.

    I never liked Schofield. I found him sickly sweet, but now I have a lot of respect for him …unless you think he was playing a part in the coverup?

  4. northsider Says:

    There’s still a massive cover-up going on. If McAlpine is innocent it still leaves the question of the prominent Tory who DID abuse Meesham – why aren’t the media going after that story? They’re all as quiet as mice. And what about the former Tory MP Rod Richards accusations against Sir Peter Morrison – why so little coverage of that? And let’s not get started on all the D notices issued during the Nulabor era. My theory is that those who pull the strings in the British establishment are frightened of inter-party bloodletting should even one high ranking member of either party be outted as a paedo. In other words they fear that if a high ranking Tory is outted the Tories will retaliate by outting a Nulabor bigwig and vice versa. This type of pact between the parties, tacit or otherwise, was what kept the activities of Labour’s Tom Driberg and the Tories’ Lord Boothby in the 1960s, from ever being exposed.

    • Carl Jones Says:

      Some very good points!! You see, I’m such a nice guy, I’d never have thought they’d have a pact…a criminal conspiracy to protect the slime in Westminster and now I understand why David Cameron acted like he did in front of Schofield! My “such a nice guy comment” is not a slight on Northsider.

      • northsider Says:

        No offence taken Carl! Mutually Assured Destruction is a perfect way to keep control of parliament. William Hague hinted as much in an interview with an Irish journalist when he was leader of the Tories. She asked him how he could make snide remarks about Peter Mandelson’s homosexuality when he himself was the subject of homosexual rumours. Hague laughed and replied rather cryptically that people who had to worrry about these things had to worry about them. I’ve never known precisely what Hague meant by saying this but I have a few theories which I won’t divulge for obvious reasons. Interestingly the same journalist, Marian McKeown, interviewed Jeffrey Archer before his fall from grace – he told her he believed the media were covering up scandals in Blair’s government. She asked him to elaborate and he replied that he would if she turned off her tape recorder. She did and said Archer then proceeded to tell her what he said was “the real story of Ron Davies and Clapham Common”. If you’re old enough to remember, Davies, a Nulabor minister, was caught cruising for gay sex on Clapham Common and was forced to resign. The Irish journalist said that after Archer told her what he said had really happened that night, she “proceeded to pick my jaw up off the floor” such was her astonishment. Since the official story of what happened with Davies on Clapham Common was very lurid in itself, it makes one wonder exactly what Archer was talking about that could have been any more shocking.

  5. Brian Says:

    The secret service have been using blackmail and entrapment since day one. Russia always used sex entrapment.
    Pedo entrapment is just another variation but a sick one. If it is visiting Saudi Princes or top politicians. The Mafia / CIA tapped Marilyn Monroe with Kennedy. The Jimmy Saville exposure was getting far to many people coming forward. There was a danger of exposing the secret service role in maintaining the supply chain of new blood. Just picking up from Kings cross is no good. They like them young and a good selection.
    This Newsnight set up was a way to stop the flow of people coming forward. To frighten them off. Steve Messham’s has been used to muddy the water. Lord McAlpines, deceased, cousin Jimmy McAlpine who lived in North Wales has been accused by some as being the McAlpine that has been confused with Loard McAlpine. But was this really the accident we are supposed to believe it was. But when you learn that Lord Mcapline wrote a bookThe New Machiavelli: The Art of Politics in Business McAlpine’s advice on dealing with the media? Spread false defeat to gain public sympathy; or false accusation and then arrange for it to be exposed as such – so the accuser will forever be treated with suspicion.’
    Was the BBC Newsnight set up to fail. So that Lord Mcalpine who has been named as a alleged pedo for years. Could suddenly come out of the wood work to defend his reputation. Discredit Steve Messham and anyone twittering on about this. With big legal threats and hopefully frighten off people coming forward. Stopping the revelation of the pedo networks. That could not only bring down the government. But open up the can of worms of how the secret service controls those in power.

    • 21st Century Wire Says:

      Our politicians are compromised by their own activities.

      This whole child abuse web is a NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE.

      Now, when will the MSM ask about Jimmy Savile’s little debriefing trips to Israel all those years? Connect the dots…

  6. northsider Says:

    Very good points. Also let’s not forget that when the gay journalist Matthew Parris supposedly outed Mandelson on Newsnight during the first Blair term, the then DG of the BBC, John Birt, banned any discussion of Mandy’s sexuality on the whole network with immediate effect. This was an extraordinary reaction as Mandelson had been outed by the News of the World many years before – when he was the then Labour leader Kinnock’s right-hand man. Anyone who had a serious interest in politics knew Mandelson was gay long before Parris made his comments on Newsnight – Private Eye had been making jokes about his sexuality for years. So whatever or whoever Birt was seeking to shield from public scrutiny, it had nothing to do with the mere fact of Mandy being gay. I would suggest that recent governments’ penchant for issuing D notices is not unrelated to this.

    • 21st Century Wire Says:

      Right, on Mandelson point it demonstrates that perhaps MCAlpine is over cooking the turkey on this one, he risks a public backlash if he appears to be going over the top. I think this is part of a larger campaign to limit free speech. It’s obvious where they going now…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: