Sunday, September 17, 2023



Sally Bercow loses libel case brought by Lord McAlpine


This morning a judge at the High Court ruled that Sally Bercow’s tweet last November about Lord McAlpine suggested that he was a “paedophile who was guilty of sexually abusing boys living in care” and therefore libelous.

Afterwards, Mrs Bercow, who now faces a huge legal bill, stated she was “surprised and disappointed” by the ruling and issued the following statement:


“I will accept the ruling as the end of the matter. I remain sorry for the distress I have caused Lord McAlpine and I repeat my apologies. I did not tweet this with malice, and I did not intend to libel Lord McAlpine. I was being conversational and mischievous, as was so often my style on Twitter”.


Sally Bercow
Sally Bercow

“I very much regret my tweet, and I promptly apologised publicly and privately to Lord McAlpine for the distress I caused him. I also made two offers of compensation. Lord McAlpine issued proceedings and the last few months have been a nightmare. I am sure he has found it as stressful as I have. Litigation is not a pleasant experience for anyone”.


“Today’s ruling should be seen as a warning to all social media users. Things can be held to be seriously defamatory, even when you do not intend them to be defamatory and do not make any express accusation. On this, I have learned my own lesson the hard way”.


Mrs Bercow might have a big mouth but we view this to be a sad day for freedom of speech and common sense.

The Steeple Times
The Steeple Times
We research and background check our articles. If you believe we have made and error in some detail please get in touch, we seek always to write the truth and stand against a press owned by a self selected few. Please help us, we will accept all your likes, subscriptions and anonymous suport. The Editor and his team at the Steeple Times.


  1. Lord McAlpine had funds to take this to court regardless of what the outcome was. The people that do not have funds to defend themselves against the press suffer the consequences. They are advised to go to the Press complaints Commision by judges such those as Jusice Tugendhat’s role eg his predecessor Justice Eady . . However this is useless when the reporters say they have contamperaneous notes. The PCC accept the reporter version of events and unless you can take this to court you suffer the same as Lord Mc Alpine did. However the consequences for the victim here that did not have funds to take the press to court was 14 years away from his Family IN Prison , the loss of his Family home of 22 years for Fraud charges. All reports stemmed from misreporting and remarks on the Internet. Wonder if J Tugendhat will address this Pro Bono of course!

  2. In my opinion the outcome of the case is clearly wrong.
    You could argue that the decision issued yesterday when considered in isolation was reasoned and logical. However an over-analysis of the meaning of seven words and no consideration whatsover of the wider context and numerous other crucial points, has produced a one dimensional, distorted and disproportionate outcome. I think this may have had something to do with the case management which did not seem designed to encourage the introduction or development of these crucial arguments. A clear departure from legal precendent and guidance. I could produce a long list of comparisions and inconsistencies with other cases to demonstrate this but they are really quite obvious when you read a few recent cases involving multiple ‘libels’. The question I am asking myself today is why.

  3. She is ghastly and vulgar and took too long to apologise. Serves her-and her ludicrous little husband right. Appointing this vulgar and common man to the Speaker of the Commons symptomised the sad decline of our once great nation. Call me a snob and you would be correct

  4. Hank
    I would probably agree and the law can be forgiving when certain factors are weighed up. But It takes no account of the intentions of the person making the comment – just the affect it has on the person it is about. I suppose in a way you can understand that. But one cannot help think that this judgement is not only wrong but vindictive and punitive, which certainly is not the supposed intention. Taking libel action is about vindication of reputation.
    What we need to do is go back to the basics. Forgot the meaning of the seven words (which everyone has become side-tracked by) and decide this. Have the comments done any harm?
    If these words had been the only ones used or were the starting point for the allegations or the trigger for their escalation, one might say they did significant harm. In this instance with everything else which was going on and considering the background I cannot conclude that they were. Despite the seriousness of the matter, these words were a relatively small part to all of this and the claimant recovered from two defendants (BBC and ITV ) probably more than he should have received or been awarded in court for all the publications/broadcasts.
    On that basis, in normal circumstances Sally Bercow’s offer however much it was, would have been sufficient and the action by McAlpine judged unnecessary and disprportionate. The legal precedent I referred to earlier and on other blogs clearly supports this view and one has to wonder why it never came into play here – when the same argument is used and accepted by judges in a significant number of libel cases. What was so different about this case that the judge departed from or at least overlooked clear guidelines for multi libel/defendant libel cases?
    Sally Bercow has been used as a scapecourt and I must admit my faith in the judiciary and even many people has been severely knocked by this case. I am yet to come across a view showing that I am wrong. A couple of people have picked away at some of my points and justified the meaning decision. I am aware of the points in the meaning decision and that is not the issue. The issue is why some major points were not considered at all which if they had been, should have resulted in a different outcome.
    I guess most people are none the wiser because they simply have not taken the trouble to read the cases – although curiously still feel qualified to insist that the judge was correct.

  5. The outcome of this case was feigned by pre- arrangement between the parties, or else we must assume and accept that Bercow’s defence team was incompetent and useless. It is only a thought, shoot me down, should you disagree.

  6. Sally is Bercowed again. Sally and the Commons Speaker are facing a storm of criticism after it emerged that their children’s nanny live in a taxpayers funded apartment in the House of Parliment.
    The Rank Organisations “Carry On” creators Peter Rogers and Gerald Thomas would have had a field day with this kind of original ideas for a new script.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

£1 per week Supports The Steeple Times

Help journalism to remain honest & independent. You can make a difference to the world today.


Subscribe For DAILY NEWS

Please subscribe, like and share this unique site, it helps us tremendously. The Steeple Times in return will send you an email at noon each and everyday, that we sincerely hope you will enjoy & look forward to seeing in your inbox.


Trending Now

‘Comeback King’ Kevin Spacey – Actor Seeks To “Leave The Nonsense Behind”

As Kevin Spacey’s eccentric ‘friend’ Geoffrey Mark claims the “exonerated” actor will now “leave the nonsense behind” and begin his comeback, we remind of his friendships with ‘curious sorts’ including Prince Andrew, Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and Harvey Weinstein.

Summer Silly Season Stories 2023 – ‘The Steeple Times’ Is Back

Matthew Steeples highlights the stories he’s been following during the ‘silly season’ summer of 2023 – amongst them matters Ghislaine Maxwell and Rudy Giuliani and podcasts about ‘true crime’ as a genre.

Most Popular Articles

Was Mucky Minx Meghan Markle A ‘Yacht Girl’ For ‘Randy Andy’?

As author Kirby Sommers suggests that the then Meghan Markle likely spent time with Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein before she met Prince Harry, we again highlight the mucky, murkiness and mendacious manner of this alleged “yacht girl.”

Most Liked...

Big Zuu (Birth Name – Zuhair Hassan)

Big Zuu Zuhair Hassan
A rapper and grime MC turned TV star of ‘Big Zuu’s Big Eats,’ Zuhair Hassan is an example of a youngster with infectious positivity and great talent. A modern-day Keith Floyd in the making.

Nasty NestSeekers

Nasty NestSeekers – Realtor turned alleged squatter Jonathan Davis – Entitled Hamptons brat Jonathan Davis exposed for allegedly squatting in a house in Sag Harbor owned by Paula Rosado during the coronavirus lockdown; it turns out he’s a realtor with NestSeekers.
Entitled Hamptons brat Jonathan Davis exposed for allegedly squatting in Sag Harbor during the coronavirus lockdown; it turns out he’s a realtor with NestSeekers.

SW3’s Smallest – Smallest Stand-Alone House In Chelsea For Sale For...

SW3’s Smallest – Smallest Stand-Alone House In Chelsea For Sale For Staggering Sum
Smallest stand-alone house in Chelsea for sale for 100% more than it was offered for in 2017; there’s barely room to swing a cat.

Cut The Conspiracy Claptrap – Crazy Theories About The Deaths Of...

Cut The Conspiracy Claptrap
Matthew Steeples suggests that the crazy conspiracy claptrap that has followed in the wake of the death of Her Majesty The Queen and the ongoing nonsense that circulates online about Jeffrey Epstein is exactly that; crazy claptrap.

Five of the Worst 2022 – Murder Houses Currently For Sale

Murder Houses Currently For Sale 2
‘The Steeple Times’ selects five houses currently for sale that previously were decked out with “police line do not cross” tape after murders occurred there.