The Noel Clarke judgment is a victory for the brave women who told us their stories – and for journalism | Katharine Viner

Katharine VinerSometimes you simply want to tug on the thread.That’s the way it began for 2 Guardian reporters within the spring of 2021, once they started to analyze claims in regards to the behaviour of Noel Clarke, the outstanding British actor and filmmaker.Sirin Kale and Lucy Osborne spoke to many sources, together with greater than 20 ladies who shared their tales about working with Clarke. Their accusations lined all method of misconduct: sexual harassment, undesirable touching and groping, sexually inappropriate behaviour, taking and sharing sexually express footage and movies with out consent, and bullying.The allegations spanned a protracted interval, from 2004 to 2019 and had been the idea of a robust collection of Guardian articles and a podcast, which led to Clarke suing the Guardian.The six-week trial came about within the excessive courtroom in March and April, and the judgment got here in in the present day. Mrs Justice Steyn dominated that what the Guardian revealed was true, and that publishing it was within the public curiosity.The decide praised our reporters’ and editors’ exhaustive method to protecting the story and famous the “in depth efforts they made to analyze, take a look at and corroborate the knowledge they acquired, and to not publish allegations which they may not substantiate”.It’s an amazing victory for the ladies who spoke to us, for the Guardian, and for investigative journalism in Britain.Virtually day-after-day over my decade as editor-in-chief of the Guardian I’ve needed to take tough selections. In some ways, deciding to battle Noel Clarke’s defamation declare was not certainly one of them. I believed from the beginning this was a case we would have liked to see by to the top – primarily, after all, for the ladies who had spoken to us for our authentic investigation, and people who then got here to the courtroom to offer testimony.I bear in mind after I was first informed in regards to the investigation: what struck me was the sheer scale of all of it.In circumstances the place there are claims of sexual misconduct, even submit the #MeToo motion, it’s uncommon to seek out ladies who’re ready to talk to journalists. While you’re speaking about somebody who’s way more highly effective than you’re, and is an enormous title within the movie and TV trade, it’s an enormous danger. But each time I acquired an replace from the investigations crew, the numbers of girls had risen. Inside days, we had greater than a dozen sources.By the point we had revealed our first investigation we had heard credible first-hand allegations from 22 ladies, and our excellent reporters had accomplished in depth work on corroboration. By the point we revealed our final article, we had spoken to greater than 100 sources.At trial we had been in a position to depend on testimony from 26 completely different individuals, a few of whom had travelled to the excessive courtroom from overseas.The numerous ladies who got here to offer testimony in courtroom didn’t flinch, regardless of the customarily intimidating techniques used to attempt to deter them each earlier than and through the trial. I attended courtroom most days and located it very transferring that so most of the ladies got here ahead and spoke so powerfully and with such dedication about a few of the worst occasions of their lives. As the good British author, actor and director Michaela Coel wrote about our sources: “Talking about these incidents takes lots of power as a result of some name them ‘gray areas’. They’re, nonetheless, removed from gray. These behaviours are unprofessional, violent, and might destroy an individual’s notion of themselves, their locations on this planet, and their profession irreparably.”A kind of witnesses, Gina Powell, a former worker of Clarke’s, was an vital supply in our reporting and a witness on the trial in March. Powell accused Clarke of sexually assaulting her and informed the courtroom that she was talking up as a result of she didn’t assume he ought to be “round younger ladies within the movie trade”. Her resolution to talk out, like that of all of our witnesses, was extremely courageous. Along with calling her a formidable, trustworthy, compelling witness who didn’t overstate or exaggerate any of the issues she addressed, Mrs Justice Steyn mentioned of her: “Braveness just isn’t evinced by the absence of concern however by mastering it, and Ms Powell demonstrated admirable bravery and integrity.”The Guardian stood by Gina and all these ladies, and the media as an entire will profit from the bravery the ladies confirmed, due to a judgment that has totally vindicated their resolution to return ahead.So this judgment is a victory for them.It’s also an vital exoneration of the Guardian – our reporters, editors and legal professionals. Investigative journalism is dangerous and costly, and reporting that includes allegations of sexual misconduct is famously extraordinarily difficult to publish.There’s the fixed menace of litigation, which is disagreeable and time-consuming. There’s the toll that it takes on the witnesses, who might have already suffered abuse, and who can usually, understandably, really feel they can’t put themselves by the trauma of a gruelling courtroom case.That’s additionally one thing confronted by our journalists. Six of us had been cross-examined within the excessive courtroom. One reporter was on the stand for 3 days. One other was the topic of extraordinarily personalised questioning. Baseless allegations of a “conspiracy” had been levelled. All carried out beautifully, standing up for journalism within the public curiosity, standing up for the Guardian.After which there may be the specter of ruinous prices. At one level, and probably in an try to pressure us to settle the case on his phrases earlier than the trial, Noel Clarke tried to extend his damages declare to the eye-watering sum of £70m.The Guardian is fortunate to have the help of the Scott Belief behind us – our house owners, who’re dedicated to journalism within the public curiosity moderately than pursuing industrial or political pursuits. They backed the journalism each step of the best way.Few defamation circumstances make it to trial exactly due to the monetary and reputational jeopardy. However this was a case the place I felt the Guardian wanted to take a stand and belief within the ladies, our journalism and the courtroom course of.It’s a great day for the Guardian, for media within the public curiosity, and for girls.Do you might have an opinion on the problems raised on this article? If you want to submit a response of as much as 300 phrases by e mail to be thought-about for publication in our letters part, please click on right here.