nvironmentalist Chris Packham has been awarded £90,000 in damages after profitable his High Court libel declare over denied allegations he misled the general public into donating to a wildlife charity.

The TV naturalist sued three males for libel over 9 articles which included claims he “manipulated” individuals into donating to rescue 5 tigers whereas realizing the animals have been nicely sorted.

The strongly denied allegations, repeated in a number of tweets and movies, associated to Mr Packham’s involvement with the Wildheart Trust, which runs a wildlife sanctuary on the Isle of Wight.

These weren't the product of any acts of accountable journalism

Dominic Wightman, editor of the web website Country Squire Magazine, defended the libel declare together with author Nigel Bean and a 3rd man, Paul Read.

Read More

In a judgment on Thursday, Mr Justice Saini dominated in Mr Packham’s favour towards Mr Wightman and Mr Bean.

The choose stated: “Mr Packham did not commit any acts of fraud or dishonesty.”

As nicely as being ordered to pay the five-figure sum in damages, Mr Wightman and Mr Bean have been additionally ordered to pay £400,000 in direction of Mr Packham’s authorized charges inside 28 days.

However, Mr Justice Saini discovered that Mr Read “had no editorial or equivalent responsibility for the statements complained of or the decision to publish them” and dismissed the declare towards him.

Mr Packham must pay a few of Mr Read’s authorized invoice, with the quantities to be assessed at a later date.

During the trial earlier this month, legal professionals for Mr Wightman and Mr Bean stated the articles within the declare may very well be defended as true or underneath the general public curiosity.

However, Mr Justice Saini stated that Mr Wightman and Mr Bean “fail to come even close to establishing the substantial truth” of the allegation Mr Packham defrauded anybody.

He added: “The approach revealed by the evidence is that rather than approaching the task with an investigative mind, these defendants targeted Mr Packham as a person against whom they had an agenda.”

Mr Packham was additionally accused of dishonestly elevating cash for the charity at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic whereas realizing it was because of obtain a £500,000 profit from its insurance coverage.

Mr Justice Saini stated the allegation was “gratuitously thrown in” as a part of “increasingly hyperbolic and vitriolic smearing” of the presenter.

The presenter’s barrister Jonathan Price – who as soon as described the allegations as “tiger fraud” – beforehand informed the High Court in London that among the articles accused Mr Packham of getting an “obvious nastiness” and enjoying the “Asperger’s victim card”.

The choose stated that Mr Wightman and Mr Bean had “used this litigation as a device to introduce offensive material to smear Mr Packham”.

He added: “These were not the product of any acts of responsible journalism.”

I do go to stroll my canine within the woods and marvel: is right now the day {that a} psychopath fuelled by all this hate turns up and kills me

The choose added that the boys had beforehand stated they might allege Mr Packham was a rapist, bully and a pervert.

“There is not a shred of evidence in support of the offensive allegations,” Mr Justice Saini stated, including: “I find they were made in order to scare off Mr Packham from seeking recourse in a public hearing for the libels.”

Mr Packham had additionally beforehand been accused of forging a demise menace he acquired in a handwritten letter, although this allegation was withdrawn throughout the trial.

Mr Justice Saini famous that “even a cursory examination of the handwriting” confirmed “obvious” variations between the presenter’s writing and the demise menace letter.

The choose stated that the defendants had instructed an knowledgeable who claimed that the menace was written by Mr Packham, after analyzing a ‘sample’ of his writing from Companies House.

He continued: “The problem was that the sample from Companies House was not Mr Packham’s handwriting. It was the handwriting of his accountant… there is no suggestion that the accountant had authored the death threat.”

The choose added that whereas this “critical error” was identified final November, “they refused to withdraw the allegation”.

The court docket additionally heard that Mr Packham stated he fears for his and his household’s safety, and that in October 2021, “masked attackers” set hearth to a automobile and burned down the gate to his dwelling.

In his written proof, he stated: “I do go to walk my dogs in the woods and wonder: is today the day that a psychopath fuelled by all this hate turns up and kills me.”

Mr Justice Saini stated that whereas the boys within the declare “did not themselves undertake wider acts of harassment to which he makes reference in his evidence, I accept that their unsubstantiated claims would have misled and agitated vocal and sometimes violent groups”.

Speaking outdoors of the Royal Courts of Justice on Thursday, Mr Packham known as the judgment “a full and frank vindication of my innocence”.