Craig harassment ‘not Mills & Boon’
Former Conservative Party leader Colin Craig was trying to minimise his sexual harassment by describing it as bad poetry and Mills & Boon-like texts, the Court of Appeal has heard.
Craig is asking the court to overturn a 2018 ruling in the High Court which found he had been defamed by political blogger Cameron Slater twice but declined to make an award.
Craig says Justice Kit Toogood was wrong to say there were not other defamatory statements made and not to give him any money.
The judge found that Craig was defamed by Slater during the fallout from the 2014 election but only in two respects.
The majority of what was published was not defamatory.
The judgment also found Craig was guilty of moderately serious sexual harassment of his former press secretary, Rachel MacGregor, on multiple occasions from early 2012 to 2014, when he told her that he was sexually attracted to her.
Much of the damage to his reputation was the result of his own actions.
At the heart of the 2017 trial was the issue of whether or not Craig sexually harassed MacGregor during the time she worked for him.
MacGregor resigned two days before the 2014 general election. Slater later published on his
Whaleoil blog critical articles about Craig’s actions towards MacGregor, including that he had sexually harassed her.
In response to the blog posts, Craig published a booklet entitled Dirty Politics and Hidden
Agendas, which stated Slater had published fabricated details about his relationship with MacGregor.
Justice Toogood ruled Craig was not defamed on the majority of points he advanced, but had been defamed by two statements published on Whaleoil.
William Akel is the lawyer appointed by the court to argue Slater’s side, as the blogger is no longer taking part in the case.
Yesterday Akel said the central issue of the case was the sexual harassment, and Craig was minimising it by comparing the tone of his texts to MacGregor as like something out of a Mills & Boon romance novel.
‘‘He’s a married man, the head of the Conservative Party, with a significant sexual interest in another woman.’’
The High Court got it right, Akel said. The proper remedy was the declarations the judge had already made rather than an award.
Craig’s lawyer, Julian Miles QC, said the judge got it wrong and there was no vindication for Craig without an award.
The court reserved its decision.