TV broadcaster: 'My honest crusade to make the world a better place for wildlife, people and environment'

                                             

Chris Packham - spelling out message  loud and clear

Just days after learning that his High Court defamation action against two (out of three) individuals had succeeded, TV naturalist Chris Packham - host of BBC TV's Springwatch - decided to provide a recap for the benefit of his many fans, some of whom may not have been up to speed. Yesterday, he took to Twitter to broadcast a personal message, complete with subtitles for the benefit of any of his followers who might be hard of hearing. He repeated  both the main allegations made against him and his refutations. Before doing so, he took further advice from his solicitors. Here is the transcript of his broadcast. 

Every day many thousands of innocent people are victims of online abuse and hate crimes. This can be racially, religiously or politically motivated. It can be generated in regard to gender politics, environmental beliefs, body shaming.

This vile part of modern life ruins lives, livelihoods, reputations, it disrupts young peoples educations, causes incalculable mental health problems and tragically causes people to take their own lives.

As it stands the criminal law is simply not there to protect us from such hate - something that must change. The current Government's Online Safety Bill is plodding along. In the meantime, a tiny minority of victims are able to take civil action.

I have won my defamation case and been awarded costs and substantial damages.

Who are the defendants?

Dominic Wightman is the editor of Country Squire Magazine. His friend and business associate is a former director of the Countryside Alliance. He claims to be or have been variously an expert on Islamic extremism and terrorism, a gold dealer, the owner of a bank, to have been working for right-wing think tanks and a search engine optimisation expert.

Nigel Bean has a keen interest in fox hunting, having ridden to hounds for thirty five years. He writes the pro hunting The Aldenham blog.

Paul Read is the proof reader for some of the defamatory articles for Country Squire Magazine and retweeted the links to them. The court dismissed my claims against him.

At the outset of this litigation the Country Squire website carried the British Association for Shooting and Conservation logo and still carries the logo of Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust, The Scottish Gamekeepers Association and Baileys – the Hunting Directory.

Mr Wightman and Mr Bean are representatives of the field sports fraternity.

In the offending articles and tweets, they accused me of defrauding the public to raise money to rescue tigers from circuses, defrauding the public by promoting a crowd-funder during the COVID epidemic, lying about the burning of peat during COP26, writing a death threat letter to myself, and elsewhere of bullying, sexual misconduct and rape. They also accused me of faking an arson attack at my home and repeatedly called upon the BBC to sack me.

In a full and frank vindication of my innocence, the court has found that 'Mr Packham did not lie and each of his own statements was made with a genuine belief in its truth'.

Mr Wightman and Mr Bean had argued that publication of the allegations was in the public interest. This defence failed 'by some margin'. The Court has said “rather than approaching the task with an investigative mind, these Defendants targeted Mr Packham as a person against whom they had an agenda.”

The articles published by Mr Wightman and Mr Bean 'gave way… to increasingly hyperbolic and vitriolic smearing of Mr Packham, with further unsubstantiated allegations'. Several articles and tweets made offensive references to my autism.

The Court has accepted that this campaign 'would have misled and agitated vocal and sometimes violent groups', who “posted threatening and vile material about Mr Packham and his family online'.

Most egregiously, all three defendants had advanced an allegation that I had forged a death threat letter to myself, an allegation that they managed to disseminate to the mainstream media. It was covered twice in The Times and widely elsewhere.

The Court has held that I did not write the death threat letter, concluding that 'even a cursory examination of the handwriting in the death threat and comparison with a true sample of Mr Packham’s handwriting demonstrates obvious differences between the two'. The handwriting experts employed by the defendants were discredited and the accusation was withdrawn during the trial by their counsel.

However, the defendants stated under oath that they still believed I wrote it. Indeed when asked what they would do should they lose the case they said, and I am paraphrasing, that they would ‘carry on’.

I would like to thank my excellent legal team, barristers Jonathan Price and Claire Overman and Carol Day and Tessa Gregory and their team from Leigh Day. They have been steadfast throughout despite often appallingly offensive abuse from the defendants. Thank you.

I would also like to thank Dr Ruth Tingay for setting up a Crowdfunder to help cover the costs of this long and expensive litigation.

And lastly, my followers. Thank you for your unswerving support and belief in my honest crusade to make the world a better place for wildlife, people and the environment.

The Wryneck says: Having won his case, Chris Packham should have been wise (and gracious) enough to let the matter rest. With victory secured, could he not find it in his heart to forgive? Is the peace pipe not worth smoking? With Sunday's ill-judged and unnecessary Twitter broadcast, the BBC's star wildlife presenter  has re-stoked the feud, in effect goading his opponents into a response. What is more, his 'crusade' comes across as a tad preachy and self-righteous. It is surely time to bury the hatchet. As is truly said, sometimes silence speaks louder than words.