9.4 C
London
Friday, April 26, 2024
HomeUKChris Packham wins 'tiger fraud' libel case.

Chris Packham wins ‘tiger fraud’ libel case.

The TV star told the London High Court he was “victim of a campaign of vicious and relentless intimidation.”

Chris Packham won a libel case accusing him of defrauding a conservation foundation.

The articles concern the Wildheart Trust, which operates a conservation refuge on the Isle of Wight.

During the proceedings, the 62-year-old told the High Court in London that he had become the “victim of a campaign of vile and relentless intimidation” due to the allegations.

Chris packham wins 'tiger fraud' libel case.
Chris packham wins 'tiger fraud' libel case.

He stated that the allegations had fueled “a vocal and violent fringe of conspiratorialists who increasingly post threatening and obscene material about me and my family” and that “random dead animals and human feces” had been sent to him regularly.

The TV naturalist sued Dominic Wightman, the online magazine’s editor, Nigel Bean, and Paul Read.

His case against Mr. Wightman and Mr. Bean was successful, but the magistrate dismissed his claim against Mr. Read.

Mr. Wightman and Mr. Bean were ordered to pay the television host £90,000 in damages.

“Mr. Packham did not deceive,” Justice Saini wrote in a 58-page ruling.

“He did not commit any type of fraud while making the fundraising statements.”

“Masked assailants torched the entrance to his home,”

Mr. Packham has always vehemently denied allegations that he defrauded and coerced people into donating to the tiger rescue charity, knowing that the animals were well looked for.

It was also alleged that he raised funds dishonestly for the charity at the start of the COVID pandemic. Knowing that the charity was to receive £500,000 from insurers.

Mr. Wightman and Mr. Bean’s solicitors stated that the articles could be defended as genuine. Whereas Mr. Read stated that he was not responsible for the publications because he was merely a “proofreader.”

“I no longer expect to live a long life free from violence and intimidation,” Mr. Packham stated in a 50-page witness statement.

Because it may only take one person reading Country Squire Magazine for terrible things to occur.

He informed the court that “masked attackers” burned a car and ruined his home’s entrance.

Read More

RELATED ARTICLES

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

Most Popular

Acid reflux meds like TUMS, Prilosec up migraine risk 70%

According to one study, the use of common over-the-counter gastritis medications such as TUMS or Prilosec can increase the likelihood of developing migraines by as much as 70 percent.  A cohort of 11,800 individuals was analyzed by researchers from the University of Maryland, of which 2,100 were users of over-the-counter anti-heartburn medications.

Outrage about crowding Visitors to Venice start paying today

Venice becomes the first city globally to implement a payment system exclusively for visitors. To verify that individuals beyond entry points possess a QR code, officials conduct arbitrary inspections. Despite this, not all individuals are content. Visitors to Venice are now required to pay an entrance fee by a contentious scheme that went into effect today. The pilot program is intended to deter tourists and reduce the volume of visitors that congest the canals during the height of the holiday season, thereby making the city more habitable for locals, according to authorities.

Meadows, Giuliani indicted in Arizona election scheme

A grand jury in the state of Arizona has indicted sixteen individuals, including Mark Meadows, the chief of staff for Donald Trump, and Rudy Giuliani, an attorney, on charges related to their purported involvement in nullifying the former president's defeat in the 2020 election.  Eleven Republicans are charged in the indictment issued late Wednesday by the state attorney general. The document in question was erroneously submitted to Congress, wherein it claimed that Trump had secured the crucial state for 2020.

US Supreme Court considers sending Trump immunity claim back

On Thursday, the United States Supreme Court indicated its willingness to remand Donald Trump's criminal case concerning his endeavors to annul the 2020 election to a lower court. This remand would enable the court to determine whether specific elements of the indictment constituted "official acts" shielded by presidential immunity. 

Recent Comments