BBC journalist refuses to say sorry to Sir Cliff
THE journalist who revealed Sir Cliff Richard had been accused of a child sex assault refused to apologise yesterday for the BBC’s coverage of the investigation.
Lawyers for the singer suggested that Dan Johnson ‘did not care a fig’ for the damage caused to the star’s reputation, or his anguish at the allegation being broadcast worldwide.
Sir Cliff, 77, who was never arrested or charged with any offence, has said he felt ‘forever tainted’.
The singer, who was dressed in black, refused to look at Mr Johnson as the journalist gave evidence at the High Court in London yesterday. Mr Johnson denied claims he had effectively blackmailed South Yorkshire Police into giving him an exclusive tip- off about the search of the singer’s home and said the force had volunteered information.
He said he had been told about the investigation by a confidential source, and had then contacted the force to ask if the star was ‘on their radar’.
Mr Johnson, who had been working for the BBC’s national news unit for a year at the time, said he had been ‘surprised’ when a senior officer agreed to brief him and had volunteered details of the investigation.
The police force admits it acted unlawfully in cooperating with the BBC, but felt it had no choice after Mr Johnson allegedly threatened to reveal the investigation before officers were ready to search Sir Cliff’s home.
Mr Johnson said he considered the news story was ‘of very broad public interest’ but wanted to wait until the day of the search before running his exclusive, and denied he had put pressure on the police. The BBC broadcast live footage of the police search of Sir Cliff’s home in Sunningdale, Berkshire, in August 2014, a month after Mr Johnson’s meeting with the force.
Sir Cliff is suing and claims the coverage was intrusive and breached his privacy.
His lawyer Justin Rushbrooke QC said it had caused the star ‘irreparable harm’ and asked if the journalist was prepared to apologise to Sir Cliff, who was sitting just a few feet away. Mr Johnson replied: ‘I accept the distress he feels. I don’t accept it was caused by me uniquely.
‘ Obviously South Yorkshire Police were part of that and my many colleagues at the BBC who were part of that story as well.’
Mr Rushbrooke asked: ‘Are you prepared to apologise to Sir Cliff for what you inflicted on him with your team, with your story?’ The journalist replied: ‘I’m sorry that he went through such a difficult time because of that investigation of those allegations.’ The lawyer added: ‘Does it not trouble you, that the reputations of innocent people can be tainted by allegations of serious sexual offences, repugnant sexual offences against children, without justification?’
Mr Johnson said: ‘People obviously shouldn’t make false allegations and it is regrettable.
‘But in this case the only evidence I had to go on was that the police were taking the allegation seriously and were progressing with an investigation. My story was based on the facts I had got from [South Yorkshire Police]. I didn’t know at that time whether Sir Cliff was guilty or innocent, I didn’t know whether the complainant who had come forward was telling the truth or not, I only had the facts of the search, the warrant and the investigation.’
Mr Johnson conceded he had referred to Sir Cliff as a ‘celebrity paedo’ in an email to colleagues, but denied it showed an irresponsible approach to journalism.
Internal BBC emails also showed he had told colleagues he had the force ‘over a barrel’ but the journalist said he was ‘half-joking’. The BBC disputes Sir Cliff’s claims and the case continues.
‘Tainted by allegations’