Cliff Richard: BBC bosses ‘should carry the can’

Latest news

    Media playback is unsupported on your device

    Media captionThe singer wins BBC privacy case at High Court but how did it get to this

    Senior BBC managers have to “carry the can”, Sir Cliff Richard has said, after winning his privacy case over the coverage of a police raid on his home.

    A High Court judge said the BBC had infringed the singer’s privacy rights in a “serious and sensationalist way”.

    Sir Cliff was not arrested or charged over the historical child sex claim and told ITV News: “If heads roll then maybe it’s because it was deserved.”

    The BBC said journalists acted in good faith and it is considering an appeal.

    The judge, Mr Justice Mann, awarded Sir Cliff an initial £210,00.

    He rejected the BBC’s case that its reporting of South Yorkshire Police’s raid of Sir Cliff’s flat in Sunningdale, Berkshire, in August 2014, which included footage filmed from a helicopter, was justified under rights of freedom of expression and of the press.

    Speaking to ITV’s Julie Etchingham, Sir Cliff, 77, said: “They [senior managers] have to carry the can. I don’t know how they are going to do it, but they’ll have to….

    “It’s too big a decision to be made badly. It was nonsense.”

    ‘Judge, jury and executioner’

    Describing the court’s decision as an “enormous relief” and “incredibly emotional”, Sir Cliff said his intention behind bringing the case was not to curtail press freedom.

    “I want a correction made to what happened to me and it was made, nobody said anything about freedom of speech but I will fight to the death against the abuse of the freedom of speech, what the BBC did was an abuse… they took it upon themselves to be judge, jury and executioner.”

    He went on to call for people to have the right to anonymity until they are charged.

    Media playback is unsupported on your device

    Media captionFans of Sir Cliff Richard cheered and sang his 1968 song Congratulations outside court

    BBC director of editorial policy and standards David Jordan said resignations were “not necessarily the right response to every mistake that every journalist makes in a news organisation”.

    He said the BBC did not regret contesting the case because a “substantial and significant” issue – concerning people being investigated by police – had been at stake.

    But he said elements of the way the original report was presented – such as the length of time the BBC gave Sir Cliff to respond to the claims and “perhaps the use of the helicopter” – might have been done differently.

    Mr Jordan said the BBC will look in depth at the 200-page judgement before deciding on whether or not to appeal.

    Speaking outside the High Court, the BBC’s director of news and current affairs Fran Unsworth apologised to Sir Cliff 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.

    In a statement, she said: “Even had the BBC not used helicopter shots or ran the story with less prominence, the Judge would still have found that the story was unlawful; despite ruling that what we broadcast about the search was accurate.”

    Media playback is unsupported on your device

    Media captionThe BBC’s director of news says the ruling is a “significant shift against press freedom”

    In his judgement, Mr Justice Mann said a suspect in a police investigation “has a reasonable expectation of privacy” and while Sir Cliff being investigated “might be of interest to the gossip-monger”, there was not a “genuine public interest” case.

    He also said while the case could have a “significant impact on press reporting”, it did not mean the law was changing or he was setting a precedent – as the Human Rights Act already covers the issues at stake, namely the right to privacy versus right to freedom of expression.

    He awarded Sir Cliff £190,000 damages and an extra £20,000 in aggravated damages after the BBC submitted its coverage of the raid for an award.

    The BBC must pay 65% of the £190,000 and South Yorkshire Police, which carried out the raid, 35%.

    South Yorkshire Police had earlier agreed to pay Sir Cliff £400,000 after settling a claim he brought against the force.

    Analysis: ‘Dark day for news reporting’

    By BBC legal correspondent Clive Coleman

    Today’s judgement is very significant.

    The judge found it was not merely the BBC’s use of helicopter pictures which breached Sir Cliff’s right to privacy. The simple naming of Sir Cliff as a suspect in the police investigation amounted to a breach of his privacy.

    It means, going forward, people who are suspects in police investigations, save in exceptional circumstances, are entitled to reasonably expect the matter is kept private and not covered by the media.

    That is why the BBC is broadening this out and saying, in effect, this is a dark day for news reporting.

    Looking at some of the police investigations covered in the past, the BBC points out that naming the suspects has sometimes resulted in additional complainants coming forward.

    Standing alongside Sir Cliff outside court, his solicitor Gideon Benaim said the singer’s motivation was “not for personal gain” but to “right a wrong”.

    He said his client had offered to settle earlier with the BBC for “reasonable” damages and an apology, but the BBC had been “defiant”.

    Media playback is unsupported on your device

    Media captionSir Cliff Richard’s lawyer said the singer “aimed to right a wrong”

    The case raised “serious questions”, he said, about the way BBC management scrutinises the work of its journalists.

    Sir Cliff told reporters he would not comment further at that time, adding: “It’s going to take a while to get over the whole emotional factor.”

    ‘Creative limbo’

    South Yorkshire Police chief constable Stephen Watson said he accepted the court’s findings and the force accepted and apologised for its mistakes at a “very early stage”.

    The judge said he would hold another hearing to determine further damages after the singer said his plans for “professional work” were “seriously disrupted” in the wake of the coverage.

    In his evidence, Sir Cliff had said in the years leading up to August 2014, he had worked regularly, released a new album every 18 months or so and usually played a number of concerts.

    But he said he had been left “in effect in creative limbo” for two years until prosecutors said he would not face any charges.

    Sir Cliff claimed his right to privacy under the Human Rights Act had been violated while the BBC argued that the same act protects freedom of expression.

    The Society of Editors said that the judgement “threatens the ability of the media as a whole to police the police”.

    Ian Murray, its executive director, said: “The ruling to make it unlawful that anyone under investigation can be named is a major step and one that has worrying consequences for press freedom and the public’s right to know.”

    View the original article:

    In the same category are

    UK inflation rate rises for first time since November UK inflation rose to 2.5% in July, after holding steady at 2.4% in the previous three months as the cost of computer games and transport increased.I...
    Kevin de Bruyne: Man City midfielder on Pep Guardiola, the Champions League and more Man City documentary 'as real as possible' - De BruyneManchester City "will never have a season like last year" as they attempt to become the first P...
    Cystic fibrosis boy, 8, urges firm to lower Orkambi drug price Image caption Luis Walker wrote to the Prime Minister asking for her help to make the drug available An eight-year-old boy with cystic fibrosis ha...
    Twitter suspends Alex Jones for one week Image copyright EPA Image caption Alex Jones will not be able to post new messages or comment on others' posts for a week Twitter is blocking the ...
    Why Spurs face a crucial couple of weeks after failure to make signings – Jermaine Jenas I agree with Mauricio Pochettino when he says it is fine that Tottenham did not sign anyone this summer - but what does concern me is who could still...
    Ben Te’o: England centre says injuries made him consider his rugby-playing future Centre Ben Te'o has played 13 times for EnglandEngland and Worcester centre Ben Te'o says his injury problems of the past year left him contemplating...

    Leave a comment

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.