Edwina Currie ‘Committed Perjury’

[Hymie]

Catching up on my delayed delivery of Private Eye, a small article on page 36 caught my eye. The article mentioned a Times obituary for Sir Richard Hartley in which he represented Currie in a libel case against the Observer in 1991. In that case she gave an account of her monogamous marriage, and the suggestion otherwise outrageous; it upset her very much.

The Observer had to pay her £5,000 damages, plus almost £150,000 in costs.

In 2002 Currie revealed that at the time of the Observer article she had recently concluded a 4 year affair with John Major.

Given that Currie’s fellow Tories Jeffery Archer and Jonathon Aitken were both jailed for lying in libel actions – why she too wasn’t charged remains a mystery.

Perhaps we have reached the point where it is acceptable for Tories to perjure themselves in a court of law, safe in the knowledge that no action will be taken.

[ToraToraTora]

Getting desperate hymie?

[bobbinwales]

If action was taken in 2 out of 3 cases of tory s doing perjury how can that show we're reached the point where its acceptable for tories to do perjury

[goodgoalie]

.....and The Times paid her £150,000 for the 'scoop' about her affair with Major. All very strange.

I wonder if there is a time limit for prosecuting someone for perjury?

[Hymie]

Perhaps the Observer should ask for the damages & costs to be paid back.

[naomi24]

What account did she give of her monogamous marriage?

[Hymie]

She sued the Observer over an article that implied that she had an extra-martial affair.

[mushroom25]

// Perhaps the Observer should ask for the damages & costs to be paid back. //

perhaps the Observer could have done that 20 years ago when the matter became public knowledge. i wonder why they didn't?

[drmorgans]

This summarises what happened:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/oct/01/uk.past

[naomi24]

She didn’t sue the Observer because they accused her of having an affair.

[goodgoalie]

From The Guardian article:
'Mrs Currie was also criticised for making much of her solid family life during a case in the high court in which she sued the Observer over an article comparing her to a ruthless fictional politician.'

She made so much of how wholesome and monogamous her marriage was. She lied under oath.

[naomi24]

That’s why I asked what she said. Do we know?

[nicebloke1]

Is this a yoke?

[douglas9401]

Why anyone bothers to criticise anything vaguely Tory on here is beyond me.

The plants from central office will argue black is white until you retire to your study with a bottle of whisky and a revolver.

[naomi24]

The plants? How very dramatic. :o)

Can’t help thinking that if there’s any real substance to this story, in relegating it to a very small article on page 36, Ian Hislop is missing a trick - and that’s not like him at all.

[Ken4155]

^
Perhaps he's saving his best material for HIGNFY, Naomi :-)

[naomi24]

Haha! He’s never one to make a meal of anything Ken - we know that.

[bednobs]

this story is 20 y out of date. Just bcause the brother of the cleaner of the aunt's dog's owner has died, doesnt mean anything

[Hymie]

douglas9401 is correct – if I were to criticise a Tory who had committed mass murder, the usual suspects would be posting on here, to defend their actions.

[Rosetta]

Have you ever heard of balance in your postings Hymie? Many of us will remember Blair's lies over Iraq, but we dont bang on about it all the time.

[Hopkirk]

Oh yes we do Rosetta. Any excuse to give Bliar a kicking.