Ouch! That was expensive

[sir.prize]

Lord McAlpine's legal team has reached a settlement of £185,000 with the BBC after he was wrongly implicated in a child sex abuse scandal.

[sir.prize]

And of course you can watch BBC Live here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/

[Mojo-Jo-Jo]

^^^ If you have a television license.

[Canary42]

I don't see why they should pay him anything, after all they did NOT name him.

Why isn't everyone chasing ITV and Schofield who DID expose some names, albeit fleetingly as he handed his list to David Cameron.

[sir.prize]

But of course, Mojo-Jo-Jo

[Gromit]

Mojo-Jo-Jo

The papers (if they are to be believed) are saying she is an high profile tRget for McAlpine. He may just go for an apology, but as she didn't actually connect him to Meeshan the why does she have to apologise?

[Mojo-Jo-Jo]

Precisely because she is high profile Gromit. They bat for the same side, sort of.
She'll say sorry, he'll grudgingly accept it whilst sending a message to everyone else that this sort of free speech thingy is just not cricket.
If you say it, expect to be jailed, or at least heftily fined.

[plautus]

I had scant sympathy for John Bercow till I saw his wife.

[askyourgran]

The Schofield list hasn't been mentioned again. I presume he didn't get the sack for his crass manoeuvre with David Cameron.

[jno]

Schofield's been disciplined

http://www.guardian.c...continue-this-morning

by his boss Peter Fincham, whom you may remember being sacked from the BBC after running a highly misleading trailer for a documentary about the queen, so he should know all about bad journalism

[jno]

and Bercow apologised some days ago: “Final on McAlpine: am VERY sorry for inadvertently fanning flames".

[youngmafbog]

It it not much money, compare it with the 1/2 million the DG has just walked away with for doing a bad job.

The BBC chould be disbanded along with the archaic licence fee.

It is plainly obvious that the lefties at the BEBC could not resist a pop at a Tory Grandee, so much so that they didnt worry about once small thin - the truth.

[youngmafbog]

//Schofield's been disciplined


Doen't one normally have to pay for that sort of thing? Are the BBC now funding rubatug shops too?

[bazwillrun]

@young

being pedantic here , but the DG walks with £1.3 million in total

[FredPuli43]

He had no case against Mrs Bercow. She merely tweeted to ask why McAlpine was suddenly trending and whatever symbol;laughing face, wink, or whatever; she put with that would not make it defamatory, even by libel lawyers' favourite test of innuendo.
£185,000 seems very low for a libel of this magnitude; you'd be looking for half a million or more; but what is odder is the report that he didn't want to cost the licence fee payer too much. If true, an apology with costs would be enough.

[ichkeria]

I think it's disgusting - he should certainly donate the money to charity.
I wonder how many other people/organisations he's going to blackmail into private settlements.
You can be damn sure it'll never go to court ...

[Hopkirk]

He could have gone for a damn sight more.

It is to his credit that he didn't.

I suspect he will donate it to charity, without making a song and dance about it.

[ichkeria]

Why is it to his credit? For one thing he's probably got his accountants working out how much extra he can make from a few more "settlements". Every little helps :-)
Sorry but I cannot find anything to admire about any of this - the BBC is rolling over - understandably perhaps - while an already wealthy individual cashes in by intimidating his accusers. Not good

[China Doll]

It's his persecutors not accusers. The victim has already stated that it was not Lord McAlpine. His name should never have been banded about at all. How would you feel if you were accused of a crime like this? I would be sickened.

[jno]

ditto, CD.

Just that the BBC didn't do it. They presumably feel some guilt over thinking McAlpine was a paedophile, but since they didn't say so I would have thought they had a strong legal case.