Sheridan v News Group Newspapers Ltd

Sheridan v. News International 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.

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.

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.

Defamation trial

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, Sheridan sacked his legal team and announced that he would represent himself following controversy over the source of a question over credit card fraud addressed to one of the witnesses.

Anvar Khan tesitified 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 allegtions were true and that she had visited a swingers' club with Sheridan and his wife's brother, where they indilged 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.

On Friday 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]

A jury of six men and five women took three hours to reach a verdict in Sheridan's favour by a majority of seven to four. The Sunday tabloid, which intends to appeal the decision, had claimed the reports were "substantially true" and must pay Mr Sheridan £200,000 damages.[5].

The day after the case Sheridan said: "I honestly don't think there is anything wrong with people who want to be swingers, as long as they are consenting adults." [6]

After the case the SSP released the minutes of the Executive Committee meeting of 9th November 2004, which had precipitated Sheridan's resignation.

Under "Tommy Sheridan's contribution", the minute read:

"The meeting began with an introduction by Tommy Sheridan. He responded to a recent article in the News of the World which alleged that a married MSP had visited a swingers/sex club in Manchester in the company of a female journalist who had now written a book about her lifestyle. Tommy admitted to the meeting that he had in fact visited the club on two occasions, in 1996 and 2002 with close friends. He acknowledged that this had been reckless behaviour and had, with hindsight, been a mistake. He reported that he had met with Keith B and Alan Mc and asked them for the opportunity to fight this on his own and for other party members if questioned about it, to either give no comment or refer all questions to himself. He said he was confident there was no proof in existence that he had visited the club.

"Tommy said he was not prepared to resign as Convener unless proof was revealed to exist. His strategy was to deny the allegations and in this regard he had already taken advice from NUJ solicitors. He also stated that it was up to each comrade to decide if they had lost confidence in his Convenership. If he did not still have the confidence of the comrades by the February national conference, he was prepared to stand down at that time citing "family reasons". He stated his belief that to stand down immediately would be a gift horse to the enemies of the party." [7] (RTF)

Effect on the Scottish Socialist Party

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.

Regardless there are a significant number of activists who felt that his court case is a misguided response to the allegations and that a political response would have been a better tactic for a socialist to take. Two opposing groups have developed within the SSP as a result of this case. However the majority of the members of the SSP identify with neither group.

Scottish Socialist Party United Left

The Scottish Socialist Party United Left is a new grouping in the Scottish Socialist Party which was launched on 13 June 2006. Some see the group's formation as being an early indication of a self-initiated purge from the party. However, that analysis runs counter to the content of the group's appeal, which confirms the signatories' commitment to uniting and building the SSP as a radical socialist party capable of challenging the capitalist system.

SSP Majority

In the immediate aftermath of the formation of the network, a counter call for peace and unity in the party was made in an SSP Members Open Letter, calling for signatories.

Controversies over the case

Tommy Sheridan emailed a motion proposing that the minutes of the Executive Committee of 9 November 2004, where he is alleged to have confessed to attending a swingers club in the presence of Anver Khan, should be destroyed.

Tommy Sheridan's lawyers were forced to apologise to a witness in the case after they falsely implied that she had served time in jail for fraud. Immediately following this incident, Sheridan fired his legal team.

On 26 May 2006 an article titled "Context is Everything" by award-winning 'Rebel Ink' weekly columnist, Kevin Williamson, attempted to question whether the News of the World story was simply a prurient, salacious sting or part of a calculated political attack against a perceived threat to the British state, was, after much discussion, not published by the party's in-house newspaper, Scottish Socialist Voice[8].

Allan Caldwell, the undercover investigative journalist who initially sold the Sheridan story to the News of the World, also infiltrated many of the 'anarchist' camps and groups that were set up around the G8 conference held in Scotland in 2005, writing a series of articles deriding the activities and lifestyles of the participants [9] [10] [11] [12].

Sheridan won the case by 7 votes to 4. (One juror dropped out during the trial because of holiday commitments.) However, as the Daily Record commented rather cautiously on 5 August, "Although he won the case, it is not necessarily assumed every shred of evidence given against him was false."

The judge commented in the course of his summing up that it may be necessary to investigate after conclusion of the case whether criminal charges should be brought against any witnesses for perjury.

External link

• SSP members' bulletin issued immediately after the case
• SSP executive committee minutes from 9 November 2004
• statement on case from SSP United Left
• extensive discussion of case from 10 August 2006 Weekly Worker