Jeremy Vine’s stalker to pay damages over marketing campaign of harassment
J
eremy Vine’s stalker has agreed to pay “substantial” damages to the broadcaster after concentrating on him with a “hurtful and distressing” marketing campaign of harassment, the High Court has been informed.
Alex Belfield, a former BBC native radio presenter, additionally wished to “apologise unreservedly” for making “false allegations of dishonesty” after settling a civil declare introduced by Mr Vine, a choose heard on Thursday.
In September, Belfield, then aged 42, was jailed for 5 years and 26 weeks after being convicted of 4 stalking costs towards broadcasters, together with the Channel 5 and BBC Radio 2 presenter.
He was discovered responsible after a trial at Nottingham Crown Court of waging a relentless stalking marketing campaign, with Mr Vine subjected to an “avalanche of hatred”.
Mr Vine beforehand launched separate civil authorized motion towards Belfield over his “campaign of defamation and harassment”, a listening to in London earlier than Mrs Justice Steyn was informed.
Gervase de Wilde, for Mr Vine, stated Belfield had made “entirely false” allegations in 9 YouTube movies and eight tweets put on-line between May and August 2020.
This included the false declare that Mr Vine was “seriously and demonstrably dishonest” as a result of he had “publicly and repeatedly lied” about his information of the circumstances wherein the BBC gave him £1,000 for a memorial occasion for radio govt John Myers.
Mr Myers, who died in June 2019, was one in every of Mr Vine’s “closest friends”, the courtroom was informed.
Mr de Wilde stated that in addition to “publishing defamatory allegations of dishonesty and theft”, Belfield additionally sought to acquire “private information concerning (Mr Vine)”, together with the telephone numbers of household and pals, “for the purposes of publishing and disclosing that information online”.
Belfield additionally inspired members of the general public to contact Mr Vine throughout his broadcasting work and through “his day-to-day life”, the courtroom heard.
Mr Vine was left “deeply distressed” by Belfield’s marketing campaign, Mr de Wilde stated, including that it was “particularly hurtful and distressing” that it centered on “his honesty in relation to an event arising from the death of his friend, Mr Myers”.
“The defendant’s defamatory allegations struck at the heart of (Mr Vine’s) long-established reputation for integrity and probity in his work as a journalist,” Mr de Wilde stated.
“(Mr Vine) was also made deeply upset and anxious by the defendant’s harassment of him, and he became concerned for the safety of his family.”
Mr de Wilde stated Belfield had beforehand “remained defiant” after Mr Vine introduced his civil declare, denying legal responsibility, referring to the broadcaster as a “liar” in a video and alleging his publications had been “challenging criticism”.
But after being convicted by a jury at Nottingham Crown Court in final 12 months’s separate prison proceedings, Belfield now accepts that “the defamatory and seriously harmful allegations of dishonesty which he made against (Mr Vine) are entirely false”, Mr de Wilde stated.
The barrister added: “He also accepts that the publications for which he was responsible have been found to have amounted to unlawful harassment of (Mr Vine).”
Mr de Wilde informed the listening to that Belfield had “agreed to pay (Mr Vine) substantial damages, as well as his legal costs, and to give undertakings subject to a penal notice in respect of future publications and conduct concerning (Mr Vine)”.
Alan Robertshaw, representing Belfield, stated the previous native radio DJ “never had any basis at all to make the false allegations of dishonesty against (Mr Vine) for which he was responsible, and nor was there any justification for his harassment of (Mr Vine)”.
“He wishes to apologise unreservedly for the damage and distress caused to (Mr Vine) and his reputation by his publications and express his profound and unreserved regret for all of the harm for which he is responsible,” Mr Robertshaw added.
Mr Vine beforehand labelled Belfield “the Jimmy Savile of trolling” through the prison trial, which heard he repeatedly posted or despatched abusive messages, movies and emails.
Jurors accepted Belfield precipitated severe alarm or misery to 2 victims and located him responsible of “simple” stalking in relation to Mr Vine and theatre blogger Philip Dehany.