 |
| Karin Ward and Freddie Starr, shortly before Starr is alleged to have groped her in Jimmy Savile's dressing room. |
The 72-year-old comedy has-been tried to claim £300,000 compensation after Karin Ward claimed that he had groped her after the filming of an episode of Savile's Clunk Click show in 1974.
Ms Ward featured prominently in the ITV documentary "Exposure - The Other Side of Jimmy Savile", which first exposed BBC presenter Savile as one of the most prolific child sex offenders of the twentieth century.
Starr's defamation claim stemmed from comments by Ms Ward's broadcast in a BBC Panorama programme. According to Ms Ward, the BBC had promised her it would not broadcast the offending segment, but had decided to anyway.
Starr's defamation claim stemmed from comments by Ms Ward's broadcast in a BBC Panorama programme. According to Ms Ward, the BBC had promised her it would not broadcast the offending segment, but had decided to anyway.
Ms Ward, who was a 15-year-old schoolgirl at the time of the alleged groping incident, was a member of the Clunk Click audience and Starr was a guest on the show. She told the court how Starr had attempted to "goose" her, by feeling her buttocks and then reaching around to feel her breasts. She also claimed that Starr had referred to her as a "titless wonder".
Starr, who initially denied ever meeting Ms Ward, denied any allegations of wrongdoing.
In his ruling the judge, Mr Justice Nicol, said: "(Ms Ward) has proved that it was true that he groped her - an underage schoolgirl - and humiliated her by calling her a 'titless wonder'."
He dismissed all of Starr's claims and ordered him to pay Ms Ward's legal costs, which are expected to be in the region of £1m.
Speaking outside the Royal Courts of Justice, Ms Ward said: "It should never have happened. All I can say is: to anybody who hasn't yet come forward who had suffered in the past, don't take this case as a reason not to say anything. Stand tall, it's not your fault. You might not have had a voice years ago, but you have now. Don't give in to bullies."
Criticising the BBC, Ms Ward's barrister David Price QC said: "It would have been nice if (the BBC) had provided some meaningful assistance to my client during the litigation, rather than letting her twist in the wind."
3 comments:
Just one small problem with this article. The end statement by that barrister chap:
"Criticising the BBC, Ms Ward's barrister David Price QC said: "It would have been nice if (the BBC) had provided some meaningful assistance to my client during the litigation, rather than letting her twist in the wind."
It shouldn't come as too much of a surprise that the BBC has neglected its moral obligations to one of Savile's victim for a second time."
That statement effectively takes away responsibility of the vile actions of (has been) Starr by making it sound as though the BBC was/is ultimately responsible. Whatever happened to laying blame where it truly belongs?
And before admins start screaming blue murder, no I am NOT a lover of the BBC whatsoever.
You're right that the ending could be neater, so I've removed the offending sentence. I don't think I've screamed blue murder about BBC luvvies for a while.
Apologies, it wasn't in refernece to any closing statement you wrote (can't even remember if you did). It was the closing statement by that Barrister chap, who is giving the impression that the BBC is responsible for an individual's vile actions. People need to take their blinkers off and stop putting blame onto corporate names and instead hold the people who RUN those corporations to account for their actions.
Post a Comment