ReportWire

Tag: Caroline flack

  • Seven main takeaways from Caroline Flack: Searching for the Truth

    Here are 7 main takeaways from the two-part documentary:

    1. Caroline’s self-inflicted injuries were so bad that doctors said she would need plastic surgery on her arms.

    The blood in the photographs of the flat, published by The Sun newspaper after being sold by one of Lewis’s friends, was Caroline’s and not Lewis’s. Caroline self-harmed with broken glass after Lewis called the police following their fight. Caroline was treated in hospital for self-inflicted cuts to her arms that were so bad that they had gone to the bone, and doctors said that she would need plastic surgery. After 12 hours in the hospital, she was then taken into police custody and locked in a cell.

    2. The Crown Prosecution Service initially said that Caroline should only receive a caution.

    Following Caroline and Lewis’s fight, which took place after the pair had been drinking, Caroline found text messages on his phone from another woman, leading her to wake him up and cause an injury to his head with the phone, which prompted Lewis to call the police. The initial CPS notes claim that Caroline should only be given a caution. This is in the notes shown on the documentary, and Caroline’s twin sister, Jody, was also told this by the CPS at the time.

    3. It was a female detective who overruled the CPS’s ‘caution’ ruling and a female prosecutor who claimed Lewis had been hit with a lamp by Caroline.

    It was a female detective on duty who analysed the case and said they wanted to appeal the CPS caution decision, leading to Caroline being charged with assault by beating, despite the fact that Lewis did not press charges and did not want to press charges. The CPS claimed they were doing so based on the bodycam footage from the police officers attending the scene. At the Magistrate’s hearing on 23rd December 2019, Prosecutor Katie Weiss told the court that Lewis had said he was hit by a lamp. Lewis has denied that Caroline hit him with a lamp, and Caroline’s lawyer, Paul Morris, points out that no lamp was taken from the crime scene and analysed as evidence.

    A spokesperson from the Metropolitan Police told the documentary makers: “It is understandable that those closest to Caroline have questions about everything that happened to her in the months before she died, including the police investigation. We have been open to those questions and have engaged with a number of independent reviews and an inquest. While there was organisational learning for us on points of process, no misconduct has been identified.”

    4. Caroline’s case was allegedly treated differently because she was famous

    As part of her extensive evidence, Christine Flack has secured the incident report, and there are several references in the notes – shown on camera in the documentary – that state that Caroline is a well-known television presenter and media personality, so there is likely to be increased media interest in the case. Her lawyer states: “She was being prosecuted because she was Caroline Flack, not for what she’d done or what she’d not done.”

    A spokesperson for the Crown Prosecution Service told the documentary makers: “All decisions in this case were made on the basis of the medical opinion available to us at the time. A person’s celebrity status never influences whether a case is taken forward. We are satisfied that the prosecution was correctly brought.”

    5.) Texts, voicenotes and video messages reveal Caroline’s mental state in her final weeks.

    Harrowing voice notes and videos from Caroline are played on the documentary, clearly showing her distress at all that is going on, as well as bandages on her wrists and hands from self-harm. Text messages are reproduced where she repeatedly claims her career and her life are over due to the case. The night before she killed herself, Caroline had been drinking and sent messages to her best friend Mollie, which make no sense, and are even reproduced.

    Emily Maddick

    Source link

  • Prince Harry WINS Phone Hacking Case – And Now He Wants To Keep 'Slaying Dragons'! – Perez Hilton

    Prince Harry WINS Phone Hacking Case – And Now He Wants To Keep 'Slaying Dragons'! – Perez Hilton

    This is huge! Prince Harry has won his phone hacking case against Mirror Group Newspapers!

    The decision was made on Friday morning in London’s High Court. The Duke of Sussex wasn’t there in person, supposedly due to the short notice of the ruling, but he is believed to have watched via video feed, per his lawyer via People. As for the verdict?

    Justice Fancourt declared that 15 of the 33 articles at the center of Harry’s lawsuit “were the product of phone hacking of his mobile phone or the mobile phones of his associates, or the product of other unlawful information-gathering.” Because of this, he was awarded £140,000 ($180,000) in damages. Whoa!

    Related: Meghan Could Be Dropped By Agents Because Of ‘Royal Racists’ Debacle?!

    The articles that were found to have been written thanks to illegally-obtained info mostly involved his relationships with exes Chelsy Davy and television presenter Caroline Flack, the BBC noted. The judge stated that MGN (owner of Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror, and The Sunday People) used “extensive” phone hacking from 2006 to 2011, with unlawful methods being an “integral part of the system” at the time. Where Harry’s concerned, Fancourt believed his phone was hacked “to a modest extent” from the end of 2003 to April 2009, according to The Guardian.

    In a statement read aloud outside of the court, Harry’s attorney, David Sherborne, said on his behalf:

    “Today is a great day for truth as well as accountability. The court has ruled that unlawful and criminal activities were carried out at all three Mirror group newspaper titles — the Mirror, the Sunday Mirror and the People — on a habitual and widespread basis for over more than a decade. This case is not just about hacking – it is about a systemic practice of unlawful and appalling behaviour, followed by cover-ups and destruction of evidence, the shocking scale of which can only be revealed through these proceedings.”

    Meghan Markle’s hubby went on:

    “I’ve been told that slaying dragons will get you burned. But in light of today’s victory and the importance of doing what is needed for a free and honest press – it’s a worthwhile price to pay. The mission continues.”

    The 39-year-old then called for police and prosecuting authorities to “investigate bringing charges against the company and those who have broken the law.”

    By the way, one of the people he wants to be held accountable is Piers Morgan, who worked at Daily Mirror from 1995 to 2004. Well, damn. That would surely be good revenge since the journalist was the one to reveal the names of the alleged royal racists on a mainstream scale after their identities were leaked in the Dutch translation of Omid Scobie‘s book Endgame! Plus he has a long history of being nasty about the Suits alum.

    As of now, it’s hard to know if anyone will bring charges against them, but the judge seemed confident they knew they were in the wrong. He went on to declare there “can be no doubt” that the former editor and other senior editors and lawyers at the newspaper group knew about the illegal information gathering, The Guardian reported.

    A spokesperson for Mirror Group Newspapers has already released a statement accepting the verdict, telling outlets:

    “We welcome today’s judgment that gives the business the necessary clarity to move forward from events that took place many years ago. Where historical wrongdoing took place, we apologise unreservedly, have taken full responsibility and paid appropriate compensation.”

    According to the BBC, they estimate the company has already spent around £100m on damages and legal costs over previous hacking cases. When Harry first filed his lawsuit in 2019, MGN denied the allegations. The ex-royal was one of four “representative” claimants chosen as “test cases” from a larger group of high-profile folks suing the publisher. So, this ruling could be very good for others moving forward.

    The father of two has also taken up legal action against News Group Newspapers and Associated Newspapers for similar claims, and he’s not doing as well in some of those cases. So, the court battle isn’t over. Thoughts? Let us know (below)!

    [Image via MEGA/WENN]

    Perez Hilton

    Source link