Matthew Steeples suggests haranguer Amber Heard is now coming to be seen as the true “domestic abuser” in the libel case brought against her by her ex-husband Johnny Depp
As has been suggested elsewhere by the wonderfully witty wildcard that is Amanda Eliasch: “What is the sordid tale hiding?” It is the question that everyone should be asking in Depp v Heard, yet there is as of yet no clear answer. Though Depp clearly has issues and is far from perfect, his aptly named Rottweiler-like lawyer Benjamin Chew made a very relevant point yesterday in declaring: “Ms. Heard physically abused him. She’s the abuser” and the evidence does seem to point to her being the far more aggressive of the pair.
Here indeed is a woman who supposedly chopped off part of her husband’s finger, stubbed out cigarettes in his face and relieved herself in their marital bed. Reportedly “jealous” of her husband’s fame and prone to “experiencing increased agitation… anger and rage” according to her own personal nurse Erin Falati, here also is a troubled bisexual drug user with a “familial history of substance abuse… anxiety, eating disorder[s], Attention Deficit Disorder, bipolar disorder, codependence issues and occasional insomnia.”
Going further Falati suggested Heard to have “emotional lability” which causes her “emotions [to] spin on a pendulum” and in her added “you see someone sad and quickly transition to extreme happiness, it’s like a pendulum.”
In a statement to Law & Crime after yesterday’s decision, Depp’s spokesperson remarked:
“Over the last 3.5 weeks, we’ve seen and heard from nearly 30 witnesses who have attested to and supported Mr. Depp’s claims that Ms. Heard defamed him in her 2018 op-ed.”
“Ms Heard’s reckless op-ed, in turn, caused him to lose a £18 million ($22.5 million, €21.4 million or درهم82.6 million) deal with Disney for Pirates of the Caribbean 6, resulting in an overall loss of earnings of over £32 million ($40 million, €38 million or درهم146.9 million) since December 18, 2018.”
“Numerous witnesses have testified that Ms Heard engaged in psychological, verbal and physical abuse towards Mr Depp and we are pleased at Chief Judge Azcarate’s ruling to continue with the trial after Mr Rottenborn failed to convince the court that there was reason to dismiss the case. We stand confident in the future of the case and for the truth to be continued to be shared.”
Mr. Depp seeks damages of “no less than £40 million” ($50 million, €47.5 million or درهم183.6 million) whilst Ms. Heard has counterclaimed £79.9 million ($100 million, €95 million or درهم367.3 million), but whatever the outcome, as is so often case, it’s always primarily the lawyers that come out top trumps.
Quite frankly, the testimony of former nurse Erin Falati, also known as Erin Boerum, is most relevant in showing the defendant as a very troubled and clearly warped of mind woman. Her notes suggest that her former patient has a “history of substance abuse including an addiction to cocaine and liquor… Client admits to a history of anxiety, eating disorder, Attention Deficit Disorder, bipolar disorder, codependence issues and occasional insomnia… experiencing increased agitation recently and has had several outbursts of anger and rage. Her mood has been labile… [She has] jealousy issues and anxiety around fiance’s fame and ability to interact with females often.”
Matthew Steeples suggests faux outrage over ‘The Mail on Sunday’s’ Angela Rayner ‘Sharon Stone moment’ article is simply another use of the ‘distraction technique’ by rotten-to-his-core Boris Johnson
The Mail on Sunday’sarticle about Angela Rayner allegedly pulling Sharon Stone-esque Basic Instinct moves to distract Boris Johnson was certainly distasteful. It was clearly a little bit April Fools’ Day-esque and smutty in tone, but equally the faux outrage is indicative of nothing but the use of the ‘distraction technique’ by a Prime Minister currently in an ever-expanding, volcano-like hole.
Whilst further angering ‘woke warriors’ everywhere this morning with their “No, Mister Speaker!” front page and “Sarah Vine’s Verdict” – which admittedly (probably given how truly ghastly she is) only made it to page 17 – this morning, the Mail’s “respectful reply” in “the name of a free press” to a summons of The Mail on Sunday’s editor to “appear” before the Commons Speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle MP, was, in my view, perfectly reasonable.
Firstly, unless he is the one telling porky pies, as yet unnamed Conservative Party sources including Conservative Members of Parliament did give The Mail on Sunday’s political editor Glen Owen the now ever-so controversial Basic Instinct story that has come to dominate the media narrative.
Secondly – at a time when the plague of ‘PartyGate’ rumbles on (‘And On And On And Ariston’) – for Boris Johnson this little episode is actually helpful. It gives him a chance to show his authority and the chance to distract from the true issues at hand. In commenting that he would shower “the terrors of the earth” if identified on the Tory that was behind the “sexist, misogynist tripe,” it is clear that the buffoon-like puppet controlled by the woman formerly known as Carrie Symonds is yet again simply playing to the gallery.
Thirdly, is this story really that outrageous given that Ms Rayner herself brought up the comparison previously in January in a podcast with comedian Matt Forde? At the time, she “joked about a ‘mortifying’ Internet meme which compared her to Sharon Stone,” according to the Independent’s Adam Forrest this morning.
May we once again today remind readers of how the late Lord McAlpine defined the ‘distraction technique’ (in a business context, admittedly) in his 1999 book The New Machiavelli: The Art of Politics in Business:
“Another option is for the businessperson to learn the art of dealing with the media, using all the tricks that go with that trade – such as the false defeat: when a person seems to lose, in order to gain public sympathy, or the false triumph: where a person seems to win in order to appear strong – thus giving credibility to any number of dubious propositions that person may wish to make in the future. Neither of these ploys are examples of the use of true facts, rather of false facts given to the media to chew on, much as a dog chews on a bone.”
“Another useful ploy is the false accusation. First, create a situation where you are wrongly accused. Then, at a convenient moment, arrange for the false accusation to be shown to be false beyond all doubt. Those who have made accusations against both the company and its management become discredited. Further accusations will then be treated with great suspicion. Always remember that people’s memories are very frail, remembering only both the high spots and the lows of a person’s career, and then seldom remembering accurately. People believe in the facts that it suits them to believe.”
Described by Margaret Thatcher at the time of publication as a “shrewd commentary,” this is a book Boris Johnson clearly has consulted and is very much guided by. Angela Rayner might do well to take a gander now also and, if she has any sense, she’ll chuck it right back at the rotten-to-his-core ‘leader’ and the ragbag of rubbish that surround him.
Responding to this storm-in-a-teacup, ‘The Critic’ commented: “Owen is today the most evil man at Westminster, and possibly in Britain, because of a story he wrote about Angela Rayner, Labour’s deputy leader. Because of that article, he’s facing demands from MPs to be stripped of his parliamentary pass. Given that this access to parliament and politicians is a prerequisite of his work, that amounts to a threat to his job. What did Owen do that was so wicked? What did he say about Rayner that might merit his dismissal? Nothing. And by that, I don’t mean ‘none of the things Owen said justify this.’ I mean that he himself said nothing about Angela Rayner. He reported someone else saying something about her. That distinction, between saying something and reporting someone else saying it, is the absolute essence of journalism, not to mention critical thinking. If journalists can’t report people saying things without being held responsible for those things, journalism is impossible. And without journalism, democracy is impossible. This isn’t complicated and it shouldn’t be controversial, but a remarkable number of people seem to think that Glen Owen [pictured above left with Angela Rayner, centre, and Boris Johnson, right] is somehow responsible for the words spoken to him by another person. Words that he then reported. For that fundamental act of journalism – reporting the newsworthy words of a politician – Owen’s name is mud at Westminster, where senior MPs are demanding his Lobby pass be withdrawn; his Editor has been summoned to a meeting with the Speaker. This is lunacy, dangerous lunacy.”Sir Keir Starmer and the Labour Party would do well to take a read of the late Alistair McAlpine’s 1999 book ‘The New Machiavelli: The Art of Politics in Business.’Was this the image that inspired the article? However ridiculous the story is, its narrative has most definitely helped the most rotten Prime Minister in history distract from his many other woes – be they ‘PartyGate,’ the cost of living crisis and a Conservative MP allegedly caught watching porn in the House of Commons chamber itself.
In comments to NBC yesterday the definite drip Prince Harry simply showed himself as hapless and controlled by his heinous harridan wife suggests Matthew Steeples
In barbed comments during an interview with NBC’s Hoda Kotb, the wazzock and wally that is Prince Harry took a swipe at other members of the royal family, their staff and the British public even also yesterday by suggesting he prefers being in America and that the Queen is not necessarily surrounded by the right people.
Beginning with his recent private visit to Windsor to see his grandmother, the 37-year-old husband of the wicked wench formerly known as Meghan Markle remarked:
“It was great. It was so nice to see her. She’s on great form. She’s always got a great sense of humour with me. Just making sure she’s protected and got the right people around her. We talk about things that she can’t talk about with anybody else, so that is always a nice piece to it.”
“Home for me now, for the time being, it’s in the States and it feels that way as well. We’ve been welcomed with open arms and it’s got such a great community up in Santa Barbara.”
Going further without specifically mentioning his legal action against his own grandmother and the British government, the definite drip continued:
“I don’t know [if I will be attending the Platinum Jubilee] yet. There’s lots of things – security issues and everything else. So, this is what I’m trying to do, trying it to make it possible that, you know, I can get my kids to meet [the Queen].”
Rather like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor before them, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are now confirmed as determined to cause yet more constitutional crises and responding on GB News, journalist and author Robert Jobson commented:
“Prince Charles has reached the end of his tether, they haven’t been in contact and had they have started blurting about that meeting, that would have been the end of it.”
“All families have problems, but you don’t go blurting off to your next door neighbour as soon as you’ve had a meeting.”
“Prince Charles thought if these conversations are out in public then I’m not putting up with it and he’s drinking at the last chance saloon.”
Clearly guided in his course of provocation by his wife, here is a once amusing young man who commanded respect who has morphed into nothing but a noxious nuisance. It is time for him to take stock and to frankly grow up or better still, just disappear.
Pictured top – Prince Harry appeared behind a banner that read “Team America” at the Invictus Games. He most definitely is no longer “Team Great Britain” and that is indeed shameful as Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II today celebrates her 96th birthday.
‘The Daily Star’ summed up the mood of the nation in their front cover this morning. It read: “The ego has landed!” and described the Queen’s grandson as a “wazzock” who believes his “true home is no longer [the] UK but [instead the] United States.” They added: “The world’s shyest egomaniac says he is personally looking after the Queen and ensuring she has the ‘right people’ around her.”Robert Jobson told GB News that Prince Charles’s second son is “drinking in the last chance saloon” in response to his provocative comments during an interview with NBC at his Invictus Games in the Netherlands. The rotten ratbag royal clearly has been primed into making condescending comments by his decidedly deviant mendacious minx wife.In times past and prior to his marriage to a wicked woman who may have been married once before or may have been married twice before, Prince William’s brother was a fun-loving sort. He was the kind of guy you’d have spotted mixing cocktails behind the bar at La Brasserie in Brompton Cross, London or downing shots at Boujis in South Kensington. You’d have found him at lock-ins in pubs in the Cotswolds and enjoying days out shooting, but now, courtesy of his ghastly wife, he’s more likely to be spotted drinking green tea or doing yoga. The once jolly boy has been turned into a drip and a woke bore. Though undoubtedly a bit reckless and misguided in his youth in dressing up as a Nazi and serial romper, the son of the late Diana, Princess of Wales has now just morphed into a total bore and all-round international embarrassment. Though his self-serving wife may think she’s got a career in politics ahead of her, this pair of pillocks will just go down in history as utter disgraces.
Matthew Steeples suggests the BBC’s ‘House of Maxwell’ to have been nothing but a damp squib that revealed little-to-nothing new about the mucky madam Ghislaine Maxwell and her pension pot plundering papa
The BBC had a real opportunity with House of Maxwell, but they actually revealed very little with their three-hour documentary series.
Aside from some taped conversations of unnamed executives prattling on about the missing money, the main theme of the three-part series was an examination of the rotten ratbag Robert Maxwell’s clear to anyone who’d already considered him’s warped beyond weird personality.
Featuring a considerable amount about his sons Kevin and Ian and their subsequent downfall, the producers missed in a trick in not actually looking into where the missing £500 million stolen by the pension pot plunderer actually ended up.
In my research towards my forthcoming book, Ghislaine Maxwell – Follow The Money, I have discovered information – backed up what has been said previously such individuals as the especially tenacious Kirby Sommers and the intrepid terrier John Sweeney – that the money trail is what matters most in the sordid saga of a family motivated by money and avarice.
Robert Maxwell did meet Jeffrey Epstein before he died and his wife did include the taxi driver turned teacher turned Ponzi schemer at the New York memorial event for him. The now since croaked paedophile did sit at the top table next to the croaked fat fraudster’s favourite daughter and she, in my humble opinion, had been instructed to use Epstein as a money funnel for her own future.
Ghislaine Maxwell had nothing if you were to believe her when she arrived in New York in 1992, yet just a short period later came to own a vast townhouse and again acquire yet another fortune.
In 1994 in London, in another key matter missed by the BBC and first revealed by The Steeple Times in 2020, the mucky madam was investigated by the Metropolitan Police – a force whose subsequent and now disgraced head, Dame Cressida Dick, was both her school and university contemporary. She was placed under surveillance and she was watched for several weeks, but curiously nothing progressed.
In 2021, I met with representatives of Channel 4 who were seeking to produce a documentary about the since convicted sex trafficker. They had another source whose Stanhope Gardens home had also been used to watch the comings and goings of young women – presumed to be prostitutes – from Ghislaine Maxwell’s Stanhope Mews East then home. Again, this failed to progress and today, having watched the entirety of the House of Maxwell, all I can report is that the unwanted gift that should not keep giving that is that house of poison is actually continuing to get away with its audacious antics.
If the clearly clever Miss Maxwell had an ounce of decency, she’d now do the right thing and fess up. She’d name names and she’d tell the truth, but of course that is highly likely. Her and her coconspirators continue to think themselves above the hoi polloi and her and the likes of Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz, Kevin Spacey and Donald Trump simply show themselves to be sick and senseless through their continued silence.
Kevin Maxwell – a not-so-clever chap once branded “Britain’s biggest ever bankrupt” – dined with the Oliver Cromwell-lookalike Owen Oyston and the woman the former Blackpool Football Club owner had supposedly raped three years earlier in 1992. Giving evidence in support of the subsequently jailed former ‘Crown Court’ actor in 1996, Maxwell remarked of why he remembered the woman: “I have only been arrested once in my life and you don’t forget it. You don’t forget what you were doing a few hours before, you don’t forget it ever.” The BBC missed a trick in not looking into the Maxwell family’s connections with such people.Why didn’t the BBC delve in more detail into the truth of how Robert Maxwell secretly bankrolled Jeffrey Epstein? The fact of the matter is that the taxi driver turned teacher turned sex trafficker was a Ponzi scheming crook whose affiliations with the Czech born tycoon turned tyrant brought together abuse both financial and sexual.‘Auntie’ also missed out by not delving into the detail of Ghislaine Maxwell’s secret 2016 marriage to fellow submarine pilot Scott Borgerson. They could have examined this in detail and they could have looked into the curious matter of why ‘Paedo Island’ had a submarine docking station.
Matthew Steeples joins those remembering Stuart Lubbock on the 21st anniversary of his rape and murder at the Essex home of the once amusing cretin Michael Barrymore as a new podcast premieres about this brutal crime
Today marks the 21st anniversary of the tragic rape and murder of Stuart Lubbock at the rightly since disgraced so-called ‘entertainer’ Michael Barrymore on 31st March 2001.
Marking this sad occasion, Mr Lubbock’s ex-wife, Sue Homan, has participated in a six-part true crime podcast titled His Name Was Stuart Lubbock and recently also recently created a new website as part of an attempt to finally help bring justice for a man killed in cold blood.
Produced and narrated by a television producer named Naomi Channell and lasting 137 minutes in total, the series is subtitled “9 people attended a party, 8 people left alive.” It delves into the details of what happened that fateful night and rightly highlights what still needs to be heard – that Michael Barrymore and his guests have not been truthful about what actually occurred.
Well worth listening to and featuring previously unheard details about this to-this-date unsolved case, it is time now for the eight people who were present when an entirely innocent father of two was slayed to finally tell the truth.
The eight people who survived a night at Michael Barrymore’s bungalow.Jonathan Kenney – a now 51-year-old – was the ‘entertainer’s’ lover at the time of the killing. He is now said to be a coach driver and resides supposedly in Cheshire.The scene of the rape and murder of Stuart Lubbock on 31st March 2001: Michael Barrymore’s then home, 4 Beaumont Park Drive, Roydon, Harlow, Essex, CM19 5HB. The property was most recently sold for £1.33 million in 2017 whilst Barrymore had paid £392,500 for it in 1998 and was forced to sell it for £802,000 in 2005 to cover costs related to his bankruptcy.Another view of the ghastly bungalow not a mansion where a most terrible crime occurred on 31st March 2001.Items that were seen initially beside the pool at the house when police arrived later went missing including a pool thermometer and a door handle.The late Terry Lubbock campaigned tirelessly to get justice for his raped and murdered son.
Justice for Stuart Lubbock – The people who need to man-up and tell the truth about what happened at Michael Barrymore’s home on 31st March 2001
Michael Parker (AKA Michael Barrymore) – Allegedly loudly said: “I need a f**k” in a taxi as he left the Millennium Nightclub to return to his home, the scene of the death of Stuart Lubbock. Barrymore later lied to a coroner’s court about facilitating drug taking at his house on the night in question also.
Barrymore claimed to have been first to have discovered the body of Stuart Lubbock at 5.45am, called his manager Mike Brown before the ambulance arrived and then left the premises. He admits that was “wrong” and also bizarrely told Piers Morgan that in spite of “knowing others were hiding secrets about what happened to Mr. Lubbock” that “I am not going to say their names. I just hope they are brave enough to come forward one day.”
Mike Brown – Agent of Michael Barrymore. Called to the property before emergency services arrived.
Kelly Campbell – Had met Michael Barrymore for the first time on the night of the incident. Claimed not to have been aware of what happened.
James Futters (sometimes spelt ‘Futers’) – A paper boy turned chef. Described as “a local from the village” and a “friend and neighbour of Barrymore.” Claimed to have been the first to discover the body with Simon Shaw and stated: “[It was not] Michael Barrymore and not Jonathan Kenney [who found him].” Later, of him the Evening Standard reported: “Barrymore offered James Futters a white powder on his finger saying: ‘Do you want to try this?’ Mr Futters told the inquest that he leaned forward and licked the powder.”
Claire Jones – Then aged 17. Had met Michael Barrymore for the first time on the night of the incident. Claimed not to have been aware of what happened but told the police that she “saw Barrymore rummaging through drawers and changing his clothes before police arrived. When he left the house, he had a ‘bundle of material’ under his arm,” according to the Evening Standard. “She added: ‘Jonathan (Kenney) was rushing through the bungalow before the ambulance and police arrived. I got the impression he was hiding something.’”
Jonathan Kenney – Estate agent, drag queen and Michael Barrymore’s then lover; later arrested on suspicion of murder but never charged; known for having a “record of violence.” Claimed to have been the first to have discovered the body and is now aged 50.
Justin Merritt – A dustman from Essex. Later arrested on suspicion of murder but never charged. Later paid £30,000 by the News of the World for an interview in which he stated Barrymore had “rubbed cocaine on Stuart Lubbock’s lips shortly before he died.”
Kylie Merritt – Sister of Justin Merritt. She also alleged Barrymore “rubbed cocaine on Stuart Lubbock’s lips shortly before he died” (curiously in the wake of her brother selling his account of the night).
Simon Shaw – Described as “a local from the village.” Michael Barrymore supposedly “ran off” to Mr. Shaw’s house to “buy himself thinking time [for two hours] before he was questioned by the police [at 7.49am].”
In addition, others, who’ve never been identified could also have possibly been present. If they were, they should come forward or be named by those listed above.
As the government is forced to publish confidential security advice about him, is Evgeny Lebedev’s goose cooked asks Matthew Steeples?
The Right Honourable The Lord Lebedev of Hampton in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and of Siberia in the Russian Federation (or just Evgeny ‘Two Beard’s’ to his multiple multi-millionaire mates) owns an Umbrian castle that features an especially shiny ‘industrial chic’ kitchen with lacquer cabinets by Minchilli.
That kitchen no doubt cost a fortune to install, but perhaps though he’s unlikely to be found their imitating domestic goddesses like ‘Highgella’ Lawson, the Evening Standard and Independent proprietor is now finding the heat being turned up on him in the pressure cooker that is the expense lover’s paradise that is the House of Lords.
Now with news that the government has been forced to publish “confidential information on how Evgeny Lebedev got a seat in the Lords, after a Parliamentary move from Labour,” Lebedev has finally decided to share his views.
Taking to Twitter the man once branded a “Londongrad playboy” shared:
“Openness and transparency are pillars of our democratic system, so I welcome the call for security advice about me provided to HOLAC to be released. I have nothing to hide.”
“And in the spirit of transparency here is a text to me from @Keir_Starmer: ‘Congratulations on your elevation to the House of Lords. All best wishes, Keir.’”
“There’s a war in Europe. Britain is facing the highest cost of living since the 1950s. And you choose to debate me based on no facts and pure innuendo. What’s become of you @UKLabour ?#shadowofyourformerself”
Brusquely remarking about Labour’s Sam Terry MP and Matt Western MP, the peer added:
“Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker for reminding @SamTarry this debate is about process and I remind him I have no links to the Kremlin. Never even been inside apart from the museum.”
“Can I remind @MattWestern_ that it’s not what ‘the former minister’ said. In the future he should either provide some evidence for this nonsense he speaks, or keep his mouth shut.”
Of him, Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner raged:
“It’s time for the prime minister to come clean today on if, and why, he interfered with British intelligence to award a peerage to his close personal friend…. [Boris Johnson was] willing to jeopardise the security of the British public for the sake of a personal friendship.”
Responding last night on Twitter to the 41-year-old crossbencher – whom I briefly met at his father’s book launch at Northcliffe House in Kensington in September 2019 – I pointed out:
“I know James Stunt claims to be a mate of yours and we did meet at your dad’s book launch in Kensington via publishers Quiller and I must say it seems unfair you are attacked for simply being Russian, you should speak out in the House of Lords where you have a platform in my view.”
Unsurprisingly, I have yet to have a response and whilst we’re not quite yet at the stage where Lord Lebedev’s goose is totally cooked, the peer’s decision to take to Twitter rather than to speak out – as I suggested last week also – in the House of Lords is the most telling indicator in this sorry story.
Today, I again reiterate: Come on ‘Milordo’ – it’s time to return from your Umbrian castle and it’s time for you to speak up and it’s time for you to actually prove that you are more a man than a mouse.
Pictured top – The kitchen at Castello di Santa Eurasia in Umbria, Italy (left); the peer who doesn’t participate yet (right).
The Russian-British businessman with amongst others the now incarcerated sex offender Harvey Weinstein.The self-declared “ex-oligarch’s” son was snapped “packing on a PDA” with his at the time supposed girlfriend, the ‘actress’ Elizabeth Hurley, in November 2014. The “romantic smooch” complete with a “whopping kiss” outside the ritzy Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Knightsbridge, London did not ultimately lead to a marital union.The ennobled peer with the titleless twerp Mr David Furnish and actress Dame Eileen Atkins DBE and ‘Rocket Man’ Sir Elton John CH CBE.
Paul Caruana Galizia, who profiled Evgeny Lebedev in the Tortoise podcast 'Lord of Siberia', outlines why there are security concerns over Lord Lebedev's admission to the House of Lords.@AndrewMarr9 | @pcaruanagaliziapic.twitter.com/STgrhtzdrm
Yesterday on Twitter, LBC Radio shared a 3:23-minute interview by Andrew Marr with the ‘Tortoise’ journalist Paul Caruana Galizia – the son of the courageous and subsequently tragically assassinated Maltese anti-corruption activist and journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia – about Lord Lebedev’s parliamentary career. In it, it was highlighted that the peer has submitted two questions to date, but never voted or spoken (other than to follow tradition and give a relatively uncontroversial maiden speech in which he stated that “children should not be going to school hungry” and claiming “free speech” was “under assault”).
In calling the mendacious money motivated ‘MeGain’ Duchess of Sussex “ghastly” and “heavily criticising” ‘Randy’ Prince Andy, Piers Morgan has hit the nail bang on the head suggests Matthew Steeples
In a bit of boyish banter Jeremy Clarkson remarked of his on-off, friend-foe in December 2012: “Americans. It took us 40 years to get rid of Piers Morgan. Please don’t send him back.”
At the time, Clarkson was undoubtedly a national treasure in my view and remains such today, but now I must admit Piers Morgan has rather gone up in my estimation.
Yesterday, taking to Twitter, the journalist observed of the ‘Modern Day Mrs Simpson’ formerly known as Meghan Markle and outrageously given her disgraceful antics still Duchess of Sussex:
“It’s amusing how my legitimate criticism of someone like the ghastly Ms Markle is automatically categorised by the woke brigade as a) racist b) sexist c) damaging to her mental health or d) because I must fancy her. In fact, it’s just because she’s ghastly.”
“I don’t hate Meghan Markle. I just hate the damage she and her drippy doormat husband are doing to the Royal Family & Monarchy with their constant unsubstantiated smears and attacks – whilst hypocritically exploiting their royal titles for huge financial gain.”
Going further and responding to someone named Vivek Khashu – a man supposedly “less trustworthy than a GB News presenter according to Patrick Cristys” (whoever he may be) according to his very own Twitter handle – Morgan summed up his thoughts on the “Sussexes’ antics” and also gave a view on Prince Harry’s disgraceful uncle, the Duke of York:
“I’ve written many columns & tweets heavily criticising Andrew and saying what he’s done is far worse than the Sussexes’ antics. So either you’re blind, wilfully ignorant or dumb as a two-ton boulder.”
Piers Morgan is spot on and we salute him for standing up the ghastly bullies of the ‘Sussex Squad’ – a group of publicity peddling trolls that includes the especially boorish Christopher Bouzy and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge loathing Finding Freedom ‘author’ Omid Scobie. It is time that these people were called out for what they are and it is time all that those that legitimately criticise the money motivated Duke and Duchess of Sussex to be allowed to remind them that they gave up responsibilities and thus gave up their rights also.
Paraphrasing Clarkson once again, today we conclude: “Americans. It took us 35 years to get rid of Prince Harry. Please don’t send him or his wicked wife back and whilst you’re at it take in the man who paid £12 million to a woman he’d supposedly never met, Prince Andrew and his feckless wife Fergie, also. Thank you ever kindly.”
Prince Andrew, his nephew Prince Harry and the nasty piece of toerag the Duchess of Sussex are the three worst members of the living royal family. They should be utterly ashamed of their sorry selves and they should all retreat to Siberia. It’d be helpful if they took the toe sucking lover formerly known as Sarah Ferguson with them also.In the first of series of tweets, Morgan rightly summed up the Duchess of Sussex as “ghastly.” He had met and spent time with this manipulative woman prior to her meeting her now husband and has rightly called her out in the time since.Going further, of Prince Charles’ second son’s wife, the journalist and broadcaster expressed that he does not “hate” her. He commented: “I just hate the damage she and her drippy family are doing to the royal family and monarchy with their constant unsubstantiated smears and attacks – whilst hypocritically exploiting their royal titles for huge financial gain.” He is spot on and this truly awful pair do genuinely deserve to be called out for what they are: Shameful and reprehensible and an embarrassment to their very own relatives.Turning to the Queen’s second son, the ‘bestie’ of the since croaked paedophile Jeffrey Epstein and the since incarcerated sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell, Morgan justifiably stated: “I’ve written many columns and tweets heavily criticising Andrew and saying what he’s done is far worse than the Sussexes’ antics.”
Why doesn’t alleged Boris Johnson “crony” Evgeny Lebedev go to the House of Lords and speak out against Putin? If he wanted to prove his critics wrong, it is time this social butterfly actually turned up in the chamber suggests Matthew Steeples
The Right Honourable The Lord Lebedev of Hampton in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and of Siberia in the Russian Federation – or Evgeny ‘Two Beards’ to his many, many, many, many mates – is an octopus-like man with tentacles everywhere, utterly everywhere.
When he’s not bothering to turn up in the House of Lords (where he’s only bothered to have spoken on one occasion and never bothered to have voted at all since being appointed in November 2020), this crossbench life peer known for being a “Londongrad playboy” is to be found giving parties for Boris Johnson or hanging out in Whitstable, Kent with his mouthy mate Janet Street-Porter.
With homes including a “blacked out Belgravia flat,” Stud House, near Hampton Court Palace and Castello di Santa Eurasia in Umbria, Italy, here is a clearly intelligent man of immense wealth who knows how to ingratiate himself with everyone from rough-and-ready women of the ilk of Tracey Emin, Elizabeth Hurley and Katie Price – who supposedly exposed her breasts at a party with Johnson and called their Russian host “you guv” – to royals including Prince William and his father Prince Charles.
Wolf owning Lebedev – whose ex-billionaire and self-professed “ex-oligarch” father Alexander was a KGB agent in the 1980s and 1990s – is as comfortable sleeping out at a fundraiser for homeless people (with his very close chum Johnson) as he is living it up with Kate Moss and he’s definitely a dark master of the art of self-promotion.
In his quest for that and a position of social standing also, ownership of the Evening Standard – where he gave Boris’ former colleague and backer George Osborne the position of editor between 2017 and 2020 in spite him having no editorial expertise – and associations with luvvies including Stephen Fry and Sir Ian McKellan most definitely have helped, but it is for his family’s “opaque relationship with Putin” that he is more worthy of note.
Now, as the psychopathic Russian tyrant pounds Ukraine with bombs, Lebedev Jr. has sensibly come out and called for the tyrannical President to “seize the moment” and “end this war” (a clear contrast to his father’s “Putin is not the villain” attitude in 2016), but equally, today, I ask Lord Lebedev: “Why don’t you actually, for once, go to the House of Lords – since you were happy to take a seat there – and speak up and condemn this rotten war in the chamber?”
If he did bother to attend and speak out against Putin, maybe, just maybe people might respect this social butterfly a little bit more; if he doesn’t, it just shows Evgeny Lebedev’s elevation to be what many have quite justifiably called it – a ‘Carrie On’ of yet more corrupt Conservative cronyism.
Pictured top – Left: The life peer – termed a “crucial media player with a very interesting background” and someone “often overlooked” by ‘Byline Times’ in October 2019 – with his “exotic pet” wolf Boris (named not after the Prime Minister Boris Johnson, but instead after Boris Yeltsin) and right: With the aforementioned PM and his Ghislaine Maxwell apologist sister Rachael Johnson.
Pictured with his broadcaster chum Janet Street-Porter CBE – a mouthy harpy who likes to talk loosely on the tawdry show ‘Loose Women.’Pictured with his party loving companion Boris Johnson – the pair have been known to have wild weekends together in Umbria and on the day the former editor of ‘The Spectator’ became leader of the Conservative Party and Prime Minister, his first port of call was a party at the Russian’s Belgravia pad.Pictured with the tantrum prone Sir Elton John and his titleless husband David Furnish – a pair whose love for Italy and its produce (including olive oil) is, like the ex-oligarch’s son, very well documented.Pictured with Prince Charles – a man whose randy brother paid £12 million to a woman he supposedly never, ever met.Pictured with Prince William – a man whose wayward brother is married to a mendacious minx who was forced to apologise to a court for being forgetful.Pictured with Kate Moss – a lady whose love for “shoveling” substances led to her passing out a party in Barcelona in 2001 in a “cocaine fueled stupor” and to her getting the nickname ‘The Tank.’Pictured with the especially grumpy actor Sir Ian McKellan – with whom he owns a pub – and former Chancellor of the Exchequer (Gideon) George Osborne – a man he appointed to edit the ‘Evening Standard’ in spite of his having no journalistic credibility for being put in such a position.Pictured with funny man David Walliams and his alleged one-time paramour Joley Richardson; Evgeny Lebedev’s friendship circle is most definitely like a curate’s egg and also for a time included the busty boob flasher Katie Price.When he was appointed a peer, the very, very wealthy, very, very connected by then Baron Lebedev wrote an article for ‘The Mail on Sunday’ and commented: “Over the past week, I have been reflecting on the media and public reaction to the list of peers appointed by the Prime Minister at the end of July. Two questions prevail: Why on earth have these people been made peers, and what is it they want from office? Let’s take the last point first. Anyone who claims that vanity plays no part in the decision to enter the House of Lords is simply not being truthful. I can certainly acknowledge that I feel great pride in becoming the first Russian peer.”
Now with dopey drip the Duke of Sussex taking on the ‘Daily Mail’ and his own granny even also in court, we ask: “Is there anything Prince Harry DOES like?”
Whilst the desperate denizens of Ukraine face the terror of rampaging Russians and the homeless freeze on the streets in London, there’s one decidedly dopey drip sitting in a £10.3 million ($14 million, €12.2 million or درهم51.4 million) mansion in sunny Montecito, California who simply spends his days dreaming up things to whine about.
The quintessential example of a privileged prat and – rather like Boris ‘The Buffoon’ Johnson and his puppeteer mistress ‘Carrie Antoinette’ – under the thumb of the money motivated minx formerly known as Meghan Markle, now, after taking the British state and thus effectively his own long-suffering grandmother to court, the duty dodger that is the Duke of Sussex has now announced he plans to take Associated Newspapers to court.
Rather like his late mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, here is someone who uses the media when it suits and here is someone who throws his toys out of the pram when it doesn’t; here, indeed, is a spoilt sap who has been turned from the kind of lad you’d enjoy a laugh and a beverage down the boozer with into a woke warbler who bores most of Britain beyond bonkers.
Undoubtedly domineered by his decidedly deviant wife – whom again we ask of: “How many times have you actually been married? Twice or three times?” – Prince Harry has clearly been schooled to follow her lead and go nuclear. Going to war on family and no longer useful old friends seems to be par for the course in ‘MeGain’s’ world and in taking up such a ghastly game, the Duke of Cambridge’s younger brother actually does nothing but bring shame on his clearly not sorry self.
It is now time for the Queen and Prince Charles to bite back and say enough is enough; the Duke and Duchess of Sussex chose personal profit over royal privilege and they chose rights over responsibilities. It is jolly well time this rotten pair of leeches were taught that you can’t have your cake and bloody eat it. Next stop for them please: Social Siberia.
In June 2021, legendary Oasis frontman Noel Gallagher told the “f**ling woke snowflake” the Duke of Sussex to “shut up.” He went further and stated: “Prince William. I feel that f**king lad’s pain. He’s got a f**king younger brother shooting his f**king mouth off with s**t that is just so unnecessary. I’d like to think I was always the William [and not the Harry]… Prince Harry is coming across like a typical f**king woke snowflake, f**king asshole. Just don’t be f**king dissing your family because there’s no need for it.”Quite rightly calls for the former party boy the Duke of Sussex to be stripped of his role as a Counsellor of State continue to grow. He has not actually lived in the United Kingdom since 2019 and in spite of maintaining a lease on Frogmore Cottage, he has shunned the British people. Like his non-sweating, Pizza Express loving uncle, the Duke of York, here is a blithering buffoon who belongs on a golf course far, far away and not at the heart of the civil life of a land that they have both only ever embarrassed.
One can always rely on the couple’s mouthy moron mate and PR peddling pillock Omid Scobie to stick his oar in. Plastic-not-fantastic Scobie, of course, is another fine example of a mouse-not-a-man totally under the thumb of the ‘Modern Day Mrs Simpson’ the Duchess of Sussex.
As Andrew Neil sues Boris Johnson’s binbagged lover Jennifer Arcuri after she tweets about him being in what some still call ‘Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book,’ Matthew Steeples reveals the truth of the curse of that little black book from someone else mentioned in it
In June 2020, Jennifer Arcuri responded to an article about her in The Steeple Times via Twitter’s messaging system. She described it as “insulting” and “inaccurate” and in spite of the fact that much of what we referenced had come from a previous interview that had been reported on by Pippa Allen-Kinross in the Mirror and Barbara McMahon in the Daily Mail, the one-time ‘Boris Bonker’ claimed it “embellished.”
In a series of private messages, Arcuri demanded: “Take it down” and when asked if she had asked the Daily Mail and Mirror to also take down the quotes to which she so objected (in spite of those remarks having been made by her own very self) announced: “I have lawyers working on that. As will this site for misquoting.” The Hacker House consultancy founder finished: “This piece is unnecessarily Nasty [sic] to me so I will go thru [sic] and make sure everything you print is not mis quoted [sic].”
Like journalist Pippa Allen-Kinross, whom I corresponded with by email, I subsequently heard no more from Jennifer Arcuri. Of her, Allen-Kinros remarked: “I personally haven’t been contacted by Ms Arcuri or anyone representing her… The source for the article was the Mail and they haven’t made any changes to the story, I would imagine that either they haven’t been contacted or they dismissed it. I have no reason to think they were published in error… Good luck!”
Responding to another Twitter user, Neil also added: ““I’ve never even met [Jeffrey Epstein], communicated with him, never mind visited any of his properties or been on his planes, cars, buses, helicopters, ponies. Now what is it you don’t understand about piss off. And apologise before you do, please, piss off.”
In other tweets, Neil remarked of why he was taking legal action against Arcuri. He stated:
“I’m taken this action not just to hold Acuri, who I’ve never met and have no interest in, to account but, more important, to establish that the Twitterati can’t just promulgate evil lies without consequences. IF you think anonymity will protect you, you’re in for a big surprise.”
“To whom it may concern. I have tonight commenced legal action against Jennifer Acuri. To those who have retweeted her vile and untrue accusations claiming or implying they have even a scintilla of veracity, my lawyers will also be coming after you. You have been warned.”
“My legal team has prepared a massive case against you and we’ll be seeking exemplary damages. Papers will be served in UK and US. I know you’ve been keeping your location private. But tell me, what’s it like in Panama City, Florida this time of year?”
Predictably from a woman with a penchant for attention and having the last word, Arcuri answered: “This guy is going to give himself a heart attack.”
As revealed in The Steeple Times previously, the infamous ‘little black book’ – which was leaked first by Gawker in redacted form in January 2015 and then in full by the cyber activists Anonymous in May 2020 – may have been found in Jeffrey Epstein’s Palm Beach pad, but in reality most of the people in it were not his connections. They were, in fact, those of his one-time lover Ghislaine Maxwell.
Mr Neil does indeed feature in that 95-page address book and has two address entries there, one in South Kensington, London and one in Midtown East, New York. Three telephone numbers and one email address for him are included.
Miss Arcuri’s error, however, is to have made an association only too commonly made and that is to assume that everyone listed in this address book was a “close” friend of Jeffrey Epstein. In fact, as was suggested by the fact checking site Snopes in February 2020: “While Epstein’s black book certainly gives some insight into his social connections, these contacts have also been described as ‘aspirational.’ In other words, not everyone listed in this book was an associate of Epstein’s. Some names in the book were people Epstein ‘aspired’ to connect with.”
Going further and speaking to The Steeple Times on the condition of anonymity last night, another person included in the ‘little black book’ told me: “I am listed in the address book. I never met or had heard of Jeffrey Epstein until this whole sordid saga unraveled, but I did know Ghislaine Maxwell socially, like I presume Andrew Neil did also, in New York and London. I believe my and Mr Neil’s mentions in that address book came about because of Ghislaine and not for any other reason.”
Asked of the implications of being referenced there, our source continued: “It has been nothing but a nightmare. I have been asked about it in social settings and I have always made clear that I did not even know who Jeffrey Epstein was. Ghislaine never mentioned him to me in the time that I knew her and I had not even seen her in ten years by the time she was arrested as we came to lead very different lives.”
“Being in that little black book is a curse when there was in fact no connection and though some people there clearly were very much more connected with Ghislaine Maxwell and some like Peter Mandelson, Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew are listed with many phone numbers, I had just two mentioned.”
“It is time that this address book was actually described correctly and referenced as ‘Ghislaine Maxwell’s little black book’ instead. I wish Mr Neil the best of British with his case against Jennifer Arcuri as what she tweeted was reprehensible and clearly very wrong. I would like to add that I think her a complete and utter disgrace.”
A redacted version of the page of the ‘little black book’ featuring the two entries for Andrew Neil.Jennifer Arcuri wouldn’t be of interest to anyone if it weren’t for her association and entaglement with the serial bonker Boris Johnson. She showed her true character in an “exclusive” interview with the ‘Mirror’ in which she issued a “rambling, expletive-laden rebuttal” about her alleged fling with the Prime Minister. In it, she remarked: “Men just trip over themselves in front of me. They fall in love with me in about 10 minutes… because I know what to say. I make men trip over their d**ks. That’s what happens. They go insane around me. They’ve been doing it for years. It’s just what happens. If I was banging the dude and there was some kind of, like trail or sex tape, but there’s nothing. There is a human side of my very complex relationship. This is not a Monica Lewinsky. The allegations are false and I am a legitimate businesswoman.”
Support for Andrew Neil’s case against Jennifer Arcuri:
