Noel Clarke has failed in his attempt to have the publisher’s defense of The Guardian dismissed in his libel lawsuit prior to the trial. The 49-year-old actor, recognized for his role in the film Kidulthood and his appearance in Doctor Who, is suing Guardian News and Media (GNM) for libel following a series of articles that began with an investigative piece in April 2021. The newspaper reported that 20 women who had professional interactions with him came forward with allegations against him. Clarke, who attended the recent court hearing dressed in a grey suit and dark-rimmed glasses, firmly denied any sexual misconduct or criminal behavior in a statement issued at that time. GNM is contesting the lawsuit in the High Court in London, asserting that their defense is based on truth and public interest. During a hearing on Wednesday, Clarke’s legal team sought to have GNM’s defense dismissed but were unsuccessful. The trial is anticipated to take place in March.
Philip Williams, representing Clarke, stated in a written submission to the court that they believe there is “overwhelming evidence not just of an attempt to pervert… but actual perversion of the course of justice.” He also claimed there had been “deliberate and permanent deletion of personal correspondence” among the three journalists involved in the investigations, as well as instances of fabrication. This, he argued, makes it “impossible for the defendant to legitimately present a positive case that it reasonably believed publishing the defamatory articles was in the public interest.”
Mr. Williams alleged that two freelance journalists were directed to “carry out wholesale deletion” of conversations on the encrypted messaging app Signal. He mentioned that one message instructed: “Delete this entire thread. I’ll create a new thread which will likely be disclosable in court.” Another message reportedly stated: “Can we delete all these threads and use the final thread from now on?” In his written submissions, Mr. Williams contended that these messages demonstrated “intent and steps to fabricate evidence.” He characterized the alleged “destruction of evidence” as “widespread and wholesale,” noting that the defendant has admitted to this.
For instance, the claimant asserts that four other group chats were set to auto-delete, a fact acknowledged by the defendant. Mr. Williams highlighted the significance of the messages instructing the two junior journalists to delete communications, as well as the creation of a “carefully curated thread” intended to support the publisher’s case. He emphasized that the core of the strike-out application revolves around whether there has been a perversion of the course of justice or spoliation of evidence that would make a fair trial impossible.
