'We will win damages' says councillor in Twitter libel case
The naming of a blogger by Twitter to an English council was a local paper scoop - and so is the follow-up by one of the councillors in the action who says ", We will win damages."
Suddenly it became clear that the social network was far from being the fortress of US journalistic freedom - and protection for themselves - that they had fondly imagined.
But if South Tyneside Council's legal coup - achieved at a cost of tens of thousands to the public purse - was news to much of Britain, it wasn't to Tyneside.
News of the action was revealed by the local press in April. And one of the councillors suing has talked of a hate campaign , telling another local paper, "When we recover damages – and we will – I will hand over every penny.”
The council sought the California order after three councillors complained they were libelled in a blog called ‘Mr Monkey’, claiming to expose what goes on behind the scenes at the authority, said the Newcastle Journal.
When the news hit the national headlines last week, the Telegraph spelled it out: Since 2008 'Mr Monkey' had levelled allegations against councillors ranging from ballot-rigging, drug-taking and fiddling expenses to a claim that one successfully ordered a public bus to turn around and pick him up from a pub late at night, the paper said.
In April, the Journal's sister paper Evening Chronicle, named Councillor Ahmed Khan (pictured) as the subject of the subpoena in which the council sought information from Twitter. They demanded the US-based website hand over all the personal details of Mr Khan's two accounts: his personal one and his councillor account. That would allow the plaintiffs to access private messages sent to his accounts. A spokesman for the council confirmed: “I can confirm Twitter has released information to our lawyers, and that this is being analysed by technical experts.” As far as the legal fees were concerned, the spokesman told the Shields Gazette: “No precise figure can be given for the cost of the legal action at this time, as the case is ongoing, but we can confirm the legal fees are less than £75,000. Councillor Khan, the deputy leader of the Independent Alliance on the council, denies being behind Mr Monkey. He said the action was a breach of human rights and also a “serious misuse of public money”. He said: “If a council can take this kind of action against one of its own councillors simply because they don’t like what I say, what hope is there for freedom of speech or privacy? The council is spending hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money in legal fees to satisfy a personal grudge. This is Orwellian. It’s like something out of 1984.” The demand for the information from Twitter was lodged with the San Mateo Superior Court in California in June 2009.Documents show four plaintiffs: council leader Iain Malcolm, David Potts, the former leader of the Tory Party on the authority, Labour councillor Anne Walsh and Rick O’Farrell, the council’s head of enterprise and regeneration. The document, drafted by US law firm McDermott Will & Emery, says: “The defendant unlawfully posted false and defamatory statements about the plaintiffs on several weblogs, more commonly called blogs.” Councillor Potts told the Shields Gazette: “We are public figures and expect to take flak, but this is a hate campaign.A lot of what has been posted is utter filth. I’ve been accused of being a drug addict. “I’m a well-known businessman and if someone ran a hate campaign against one of my employees, I would do everything in my power to track down those responsible. “This is not a waste of taxpayers’ money. When we recover damages – and we will – I will hand over every penny.”