Sheridan v News International

Sheridan v News International (Thomas Sheridan v News Group Newspapers Ltd.) is a court case brought by Tommy Sheridan against the publishers of the News of the World, which began in the Court of Session in Edinburgh, Scotland, on 4 July 2006. Unusually in Scots law civil proceedings, the case was heard before a jury.

1 Background
2 The trial
3 Matters arising
4 Sources
5 External links

[edit] Background

Tommy Sheridan was a leading figure in the negotiations to establish the Scottish Socialist Alliance in 1996, which evolved into the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) in 1998. He was elected to the Scottish Parliament in 1999 as a Glasgow representative of the SSP which he remained until he broke with the SSP in the aftermath of the court case to form a new organisation.

He was the convenor of the SSP from its formation until November 11, 2004 when he was asked to resign, by a unanimous vote of the National Executive of the SSP. [1]

He later claimed to have resigned due to 'personal reasons' citing a desire to spend more time with his family. At the time of his announcement, his wife Gail was expecting their first child, and this was the reason Sheridan cited as being his primary motivation for resigning:

"I cannot continue to be the party convener and be a proper father. We are entering uncharted waters, Gail and I."

"We are older parents, and we are excited but petrified.

"Since the announcement of Gail's pregnancy, it has focussed my mind completely. We have been discussing this for some weeks." [2]

After his announcement to step down for family reasons, the News of the World ran a series of articles, alleging that he had had an extra-maritial affair. Sheridan strenuously denied the accusations and quickly announced his intention to sue. The executive of the Scottish Socialist Party requested that he pursued a political rather than legal response to the allegations and declined to publicly back his court case.

As part of their defence, the News of the World demanded that the Scottish Socialist Party hand over all documents related to the executive committee immediately prior to Tommy Sheridan's resignation. The Executive Committee of the party declined and publicly requested that Sheridan withdrew from court case. In refusing to hand over the documents, Alan McCombes the party's policy co-ordinator was found in contempt of court and jailed for 12 days, while the Scottish Socialist Party offices and McCombes' private home were raided by Messengers at Arms. The following National Council supported a request by Sheridan that the minutes were handed over to the court at the earliest possible opportunity and voted to give him "full political support" in his libel action.

[edit] The trial

[edit] Defender's case

The jury heard allegations that Sheridan had visited "swingers" clubs in Sheffield and Manchester and had engaged in an adulterous affair with another woman. Sheridan, who claims to be teetotal was also alleged to have drunk champagne during an extra-marital liaison. Sheridan denied these allegations.

Allison Kane, SSP Treasurer, alleged in Court that Sheridan had admitted to a party meeting that the allegations concerning his private life were true, but that the newspaper would be unable to prove them. She told the Court that the controversial minute which the party had sought to withhold had noted this. Alan McCombes, the SSP official who had previously been jailed for refusing to hand over minutes of a party meeting when required to do so as part of this litigation, told the Court that Sheridan had admitted to him that he had visited swingers clubs. Sheridan admitted to a meeting of the SSP executive that he had visited Cupids in Manchester, according to the testimony of 11 SSP members who were at the meeting, including Colin Fox, Carolyn Leckie, Allan Green, Rosie Kane, Catriona Grant, Keith Baldassara, Jo Harvie and Barbara Scott.

On 14 July 2006, a controversial incident occurred during the presentation of the pursuer's case. Graeme Henderson, the junior advocate for the pursuer, suggested to witness Ann Colvin that she had a conviction for credit card fraud. This was untrue, which led to the judge warning Henderson that he had broken the Faculty of Advocates code of conduct. As a result of the incident, Tommy Sheridan dismissed his legal team and represented himself thereafter.^[1]

Anvar Khan testified in court that, as well as having sexual relations with Sheridan while he was married she witnessed Sheridan engaging in group sex with Katrine Trolle, an SSP candidate in 2003, and Sheridan's brother-in-law. Trolle later testified that these allegations were true and that she had visited a swingers' club with Sheridan and his wife's sister's husband, where they indulged in group sex. Two of Trolle's housemates also testified to having met Sheridan in the home they shared with Trolle and seeing Sheridan going upstairs to her bedroom with her.

Two other women claimed to have seen Sheridan engaging in group sex in a Glasgow hotel on another occasion. One of these witnesses claimed to have been threatened by someone allegedly trying to protect Sheridan. These witnesses had attempted to sell their stories. [3]

In total, 18 witnesses testified that they had either had sexual relations with him while he was married, witnessed Sheridan taking part in sex sessions or having heard him admit to visiting swingers' clubs.

[edit] Pursuer's case

On 28 July, the News of the World editor, in evidence, confessed that the Newspaper had changed parts of their story. This followed earlier evidence where the newspapers journalist Anvar Khan admitted that parts of her story had been senationalised to help sell her book. She altered her story admitting that the alcohol, drugs and spanking had been added. It emerged during the trial, from evidence given by an NUJ official, Paul Holleran, that Ms Khan had been pressurised by the News of the World to spice up the story while her contract was up for renewal. Under questioning, Holleran admitted to having passed on details of confidential discussions with Ms Khan - also an NUJ member - to Sheridan to assist his case against News of the World. [4]

[edit] The judge's summation

On 4 August 2006, the judge commented in the course of his summing up that, due to the nature of the conflicting witness evidence, it may be necessary to investigate after conclusion of the case whether criminal charges should be brought against any witnesses for perjury.^[2]

[edit] The verdict

On 4 August 2006, the jury of six men and five women decided, after three hours deliberation, that Tommy Sheridan had been defamed. The News of the World was ordered to pay damages of GBP 200,000.^[2]

[edit] Matters arising

On 7 August 2006 in an article for BBC News, solicitor Alistair Bonnington commented on speculation that perjury charges might be brought against the witnesses for the News of the World. His view was that charges were unlikely because of the difficulty in proving perjury.^[3]

On 11 August 2006, BBC News reported that the News of the World had lodged an appeal with the Court of Session in Edinburgh, but it had not been formally accepted.^[4]

On 15 August 2006, Lord Turnbull wrote to the Faculty of Advocates about the incident in the trial where one of the pursuer's advocates falsely claimed that a witness had a criminal record.^[1]

On 22 August 2006, the Crown Office reported that it had instructed the Procurator Fiscal at Edinburgh to decide if there were grounds for a criminal investigation into whether witnesses had committed perjury during the trial.

On 2 October 2006, the Crown Office reported that the Procurator Fiscal had decided that there were grounds for an investigation, and had instructed Lothian and Borders Police to proceed with one.^[5]

On 10 October 2006, BBC News reported that Grampian police were investigating a claim by Fiona McGuire, who had been a witness in the trial for the News of the World, that she had received a death threat through the post. In a statement to the BBC, Mr Sheridan said: "I utterly condemn any threats to Fiona McGuire or any other individual".^[6]

On 19 October 2006, it was reported that the police had interviewed a member of the Scottish Socialist Party, and were intending on 20 October 2006 to seize computing equipment that had been used to type the minutes of party meetings.^[7]