Noel Clarke has made “wild allegations” against women who have accused him of sexual misconduct but has not explained why they would lie about him, the high court heard on the first day of his libel claim against the Guardian.
The 49-year-old actor is suing Guardian News and Media (GNM) over seven articles and a podcast published between April 2021 and March 2022 in which more than 20 women accused him of sexual misconduct.
In written submissions, Gavin Millar KC, for GNM, said: “[The defendant] will adduce evidence from 16 women who experienced C’s [the claimant’s] misconduct first-hand, some of them on multiple occasions. There is no motive for them to lie and [the claimant] has not suggested any, beyond making wild allegations as to an alleged conspiracy.
“These witnesses have remained willing to give their evidence voluntarily despite the fact that, over the course of litigation, [the claimant] has published a number of statements on social media and elsewhere expressly or impliedly denigrating those who have made allegations against him, no doubt in the hope of deterring women from cooperating with [the defendant].
“[The claimant] went so far as to threaten one of the women, ‘Imogen’, with a report to the police if she did not agree to meet [the claimant’s] solicitors. She did not agree and he carried out his threat.”
Millar said the women had chosen to give evidence “at personal cost” as they would have to “recount and relive in public experiences that were personal and private and, at best, deeply unpleasant for them”.
In oral submissions, Millar told the court that, before publication, there was a three-and-a-half-week investigation by two reporters overseen by the Guardian’s head of investigations working very long hours.
Millar told the court the journalists independently corroborated the initial allegations received by the Guardian.
He said that by the time of the publication of the sixth article, the journalists had spoken to 34 sources with credible first-hand allegations against Clarke. He said this was “an unusually high number”.
For Clarke’s arguments to succeed, Millar said “the allegations received by the Guardian all have to be lies”, stressing that there was no independent evidence to suggest this.
According to GNM’s written submissions to court, its evidence will include claims that Clarke:
Touched an actor close to her vagina with his erect penis during filming of a sex scene.
Exposed his erect penis to a producer who worked for him and later sexually assaulted her while they were away on business in Los Angeles.
Secretly filmed a young actor’s naked audition.
Followed a production coordinator into a cubicle in the women’s toilets and propositioned her.
Shared explicit photographs of women without their consent.
Made inappropriate sexual comments to women.
The former Doctor Who star, who was in court, denies all the allegations. Philip Williams, appearing for Clarke, said the actor was seeking £70m in damages if successful in the six-week trial.
The biggest libel award in British legal history is believed to be £1.5m.
Williams said in written submissions that his client was the victim of a conspiracy that sought “to cause irreparable damage to the claimant’s reputation and consequent financial loss. The conspirators did this by creating and/or corroborating and/or relaying and/or reporting false and fabricated allegations of rape, sexual assault, other sexual misconduct and false and/or exaggerated claims of sexual harassment.”
He said the Guardian’s sources were motivated by “maliciousness … plainly aimed at sabotaging the claimant’s Bafta award [awarded in 2021 for outstanding British contribution to cinema]”. The award was later suspended.
Williams claimed the Guardian had “been caught up in a nasty conspiracy”.
Williams said the Guardian had “played the role of judge, jury and executioner” of Clarke’s career and reputation. In oral submissions he said the Guardian’s reporting had “more holes than a colander”, was untrue and that the publisher did not reasonably believe it was in the public interest.
“They didn’t carry out the investigations properly,” he said. “The answers were there in plain sight, the contradictions were there in plain sight, the dishonesty was there in plain sight.”
He added: “Without proper proof, the Guardian’s journalists still recklessly proceeded to publication.”
Clarke does admit commenting twice on the buttocks of a standby art director for film and TV who worked for him on his film Brotherhood. But he says he apologised, including formally at a meeting, and his apology was accepted.
Clarke says some of the complainants continued to work with him and maintained positive relationships with him, which he claims they would not have done if the allegations were true.
He said in some cases it was his accusers who had made sexual comments to him or engaged in consensual “banter”.
Clarke also claims there are inconsistencies in witness statements, including in timelines, which make it impossible that specific incidents took place as alleged.
The trial is expected to last about five weeks, with Clarke due to begin giving evidence under oath on Monday.
