Thursday, 21 April 2011

Christopher Jefferies sues for libel

When Christopher Jefferies was arrested during the investigation into the murder of Jo Yeates, some sections of the media launched into a quite disgraceful character assassination of the man who would be eventually released without charge:

The Mail called Jefferies 'Mr Strange', 'the 'nutty professor' and 'Professor Strange'. He 'idolised a poet obsessed by death', they claimed. The Mirror called him a 'peeping tom'. The Sun called him 'strange' and 'obsessed by death' and in one article, as Anton pointed out, he was described as:

"weird", "lewd", "strange", "creepy", "angry", "odd", "disturbing", "eccentric", "a loner" and "unusual".

In unsurprising news, his lawyers announced today:

Mr Christopher Jefferies has today given notice of libel and privacy claims against a large number of national and local newspapers in relation to articles published by them in December 2010 and January 2011.

The newspapers include The Sun, Daily Mirror, Daily Mail, Daily Express and Daily Star among others. Mr Jefferies will be seeking vindication of his reputation for the terrible treatment he received. Mr Jefferies will not be making any statement about these claims until their conclusion, which he hopes will be in the very near future.

Simons Muirhead & Burton partner, Louis Charalambous, who also represented Robert Murat, leads the team representing Mr Jefferies in these libel and privacy claims.


  1. I hope he puts the scum out of business. Good on him.

  2. Why did they feel the need to mention who the lawyers have defended in the past? A quick search for Robert Murat in Google doesn't bring up their apology to him, just loads of reports of his questioning.

  3. I hope every paper which jumped on the bandwagon is forced to print a full and unreserved front page apology and made to pay out a damaging amount of compensation.

    I know that's highly unlikely to happen, but I can live in hope.

  4. Libel seems to be the only way to touch the papers these days. Good luck to him.

  5. Good for him! Hope he wins.

  6. Good. I hope the papers get more than a wrap on the knuckles, his treatment was appalling. They need to realise they can't get away with this sort of thing, if being a bit odd is a crime then at least half of us could seem like killers.
    That's beside a casual approach to any future criminal prosecution (not relevant here, but you get my meaning).

    I realise the owners and editors are ultimately responsible, but also, how do some of these journalists sleep at night?

  7. Reminds me of the Daisy Harris investigation on Monkey Dust.


  8. I'll be watching this story with interest. I hope sincerely that Mr Jeffries wins, and wins BIG. I agree with your third commenter above that he should settle for nothing less than apologies that take up the whole front page of the offending newspapers, and a large wedge of cash to allow him to continue his eccentricities indefinitely.

  9. Good man. That's all that can be said. The disgusting creatures that allowed this sort of treatment to occur should be put in the stocks. Harrumph.

  10. And James, I don't remember Robert Murat being referred to as 'Professor Strange'. Or anything else. Did he?

  11. Fascinating piece. You might be interested in my article on the subject:


Thanks for taking the time to leave a comment.

Comments are moderated - generally to filter out spam and comments wishing death on people - but other messages will be approved as quickly as possible.