Archbishop Jonathan Blake

The Most Reverend Jonathan Blake, Presiding Archbishop of the Open Episcopal Church B.A. (Hons), Dip. Pastoral Studies. Bishop's Haven, 105 Danson Crescent Welling DA16 2AS U.K. Mobile: 07767 687711 www.bishopjonathanblake.com bishopjonathanblake@ntlworld.com www.openepiscopalchurch.org www.twitter.com/bishopjonathan The Church is a member of The International Council of Community churches and the World Council of Churches. Married and a proud Dad.

My Photo
Name:
Location: London, Kent, United Kingdom

Gassed in Tehran, seized in Kabul, helped Mother Teresa, almost murdered, raised £300,000, ordained 1981, street sleeper, pilgrim to Auschwitz, Kenya + Pakistan 4 peace, began 1st inter-faith NHS chapel, wrote text on Parliament, arrested, relinquished his 12 year Anglican post 2 be independent, baptised 1000's in homes, on Mt Snowdon + in circus ring, did wedding underwater, wrote ‘For God’s Sake Don’t Go To Church’, nailed 95 Theses to Canterbury cathedral, arrested, co-founded the Society for Independent Ministry, was consecrated a bishop, co-founded the Open Episcopal Church, did 1st gay wedding on prime time TV, sued Associated Newspapers 4 defamation, co-consecrated 1st women bishops 4 England. Wales + Scotland, accommodated the homeless, took Mass 2 sex workers + posted it, elected Archbishop, arrested 4 taking kids on roof, not charged, founded ‘When No One’s Watching', became an ICV, did Jade Goody's wedding , invited 2 Downing St, wrote 'That Old Devil Called God Again', arrested 4 times campaigning against child abuse, had harassment conviction quashed on appeal, appealing a conviction for breaches of restraining order 2 stop a paedophile

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

PETER CRUDDAS

It should be made clear, for the sake of accuracy and balanced reporting and the quest to "hold power to account",  that the Court of Appeal confirmed that the defendants were liable for libel and malicious falsehood in respect of meanings 2 and 3, that they knew the meanings 2 and 3 were untrue, that the journalists were malicious in relation to meanings 2 and 3, that there were many shortcomings in the Sunday Times articles and that in some respects the articles were unfair to Mr Cruddas. The Court of Appeal made an award of £50,000 for damages in favour of the claimant  and maintained the injunction relating to meanings 2 and 3.  Please can the Sunday Times disclose what their costs have been and whether they have been or will be ordered to pay all, or a proportion of the claimant's costs? Will the Sunday Times also justify why they have reported the judgement in a biased and misleading manner, which appears more about defending vested interests rather than upholding the finest standards in investigative journalism.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/article1532141.ece

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home