Lord McAlpine has ceased legal action against some Twitter users who wrongly named him as a paedophile on the micro-blogging site.
The allegations arose from a Newsnight investigation into historical allegations at care homes in North Wales, broadcast on 2 November. Lord McAlpine was not named in the programme, but was incorrectly linked to the claims on the Internet.
Once it became clear that he was not involved, Newsnight made a full on-air apology one week later and the BBC paid him £185,000 in damages.
In a statement to the BBC, McAlpine said that he would cover all the administration costs and expressed his desire to bring this “unfortunate episode” to a close and that he had instructed his lawyers to focus their attention on Sally Bercow, the Speaker’s wife, one of those who tweeted about the Newsnight investigation.
Legal action against Bercow was launched in December for damages not exceeding £50,000, to be donated to a charity of her choice.
Lord McAlpine has already reached a settlement with ITV after This Morning presenter Phillip Schofield handed Prime Minister David Cameron a list of alleged paedophiles he had found on the Internet, live on the programme. Part of the list was clearly visible to viewers, contributing to Lord McAlpine’s fear that he would become a public hate figure.
Are you an expert on social networks? Take our quiz!
Suspended prison sentence for Craig Wright for “flagrant breach” of court order, after his false…
Cash-strapped south American country agrees to sell or discontinue its national Bitcoin wallet after signing…
Google's change will allow advertisers to track customers' digital “fingerprints”, but UK data protection watchdog…
Welcome to Silicon In Focus Podcast: Tech in 2025! Join Steven Webb, UK Chief Technology…
European Commission publishes preliminary instructions to Apple on how to open up iOS to rivals,…
San Francisco jury finds Nima Momeni guilty of second-degree murder of Cash App founder Bob…
View Comments
Oh dear - he has decided to focus on Sally Bercow which seems
a very weak case.
It has to be an abuse of process on the basis he has been compensated already. Also the damages of £50,000 would never be awarded against one individual who took such a small part in this. All damage has to be considered in the round and in the context of all posts/tweets. That's assuming what SB tweeted was actionable which seems highly questionable.
I do wonder where his solicitor is getting his legal advice from.