Friday, June 15, 2007

Jon Snow threatens legal action against Arcati

Jon Snow's legal reps have written to Arcati demanding the removal of two "defamatory" items on this blog which arose from a report in the Mail on Sunday about his relationship with writer Precious Williams. Snow's solicitors claim he had no relationship with her - in fact they say that Snow does not know "any lady called Precious Williams." Snow's principal concern is to "protect his reputation".

As a gesture of good faith I have taken down the contentious articles they complain of but I shall continue to delve into this matter which makes little sense from beginning to end.

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

Jon "Horndog" Snow is really throwing his weight around, isn't he? What a shame he was successful in intimidating you, Madame Arcati. It seems he's trying to make absolutely everybody dance to his tune with his empty threats to sue. Why didn't you go after damages from the Mail on Sunday, Jonny Boy? I think we all know the answer to that one......

Cadbury Egg said...

Does Jon Snow not realize that he is making himself look yet more shifty with all these legal threats? The man doth protest too much methinks. Or maybe he's just paranoid from all the weed he's been inhaling?

Walter Ellis said...

"As a gesture of good faith," you say. As a means of deflecting Snow's lawyers, more like.

You say that this sorry episode makes no sense. In that case, just leave it. As I said before, who cares?

As for Mr Cadbury's contribution, I wonder would he be prepared to put his real name against the suggestion – on your site, Madame – that Snow is a habitual drug user. Or is he just an idiot enjoying a cheap laugh?

I wonder, by the way, if under the Freedom of Information Act Snow could demand to know who you are. You weave a tangled web.

Bonne chance!

Anonymous said...

Mr Ellis, it's MS Cadbury actually. My real name's Andrea English. I stand by what I have said. I think Jon Snow is being just as truthful about this as Clinton and Profumo and Jeffrey Archer were in their own sordid pasts....

Liz said...

Walter,
FoI only covers official bodies and MA is right to remove it pending further inquiries.

Threats of litigation are an occupational hazard for journalists and often come to nothing.

Has Mr Snow also threatened to sue Precious Williams and if so what does she say about it?

Anonymous said...

Jon Snow won't threaten to sue Precious Williams because he knows what she knows.

Arcati said...

Thank you for your comments - and those doubtless to come.

The law of this land reverses the usual burden of proof in defamation cases and presumes against the defendant. It would therefore be foolhardy to continue publishing claims that appear to be libellous when disputed. I also recognise that Snow is entitled to his good name if he has does nothing to compromise it.

It would be a huge mistake however to imagine that the matter is closed. If Precious Williams has evidence that Jon Snow even knows her - let alone slept with her - then that's that for him. His contention is that he does not know her - against such a simple statement the only response is either acceptance or the production of evidence to the contrary. As I write, I do not have that evidence in my hands.

Now, as to you Walter: I shall be generous and accept that you are a journalist. Yet what kind of journalist would just give up on what is an intriguing story and which throws questions on the integrity of a national newspaper, a highly respected broadcast journalist and a respected print journalist?

There are risks in publishing claims and counter-claims, but capitulation is not the appropriate response. The sensible option is to wait for the production of hard evidence that moves the story on.

So, now I am waiting and I am watching.

walter_ellis said...

Well done, Ms English. Good egg, in fact. You have now put your name against the view that Jon Snow has a "sordid" past, like Bill Clinton, the late John Profumo and Lord Archer. Clearly, in this instance, a nod's as good as a wank to a blind man.

A. Nonymous obviously knows what both Snow and Williams know. Sadly, I am less well informed. What about you, Nonymous? Have you ever strayed from the true path? I dare say your friends know the answer to that. Let's just hope they don't say anything.

Here's what I know: People are people. They live people-ish lives. Unless serious laws are broken or someone gets seriously hurt, we should leave it to the parties themselves to sort out.

Or should the name of this blog be changed to The Moral Crusade (Incorporating Big Dicks magazine)?

P.S. What about that Welsh bloke what reads the news? How do we know he's not having an affair? If he was, he wouldn't admit it, would he? No way. And you know why? 'Cos he's a liar. I think I read something in the News of the World about him? Or was that Trevor Macdonald? Doesn't matter. They're all at it, Can't believe a word they say. 'Course the papers is just as bad. Make most of it up, you ask me. They're all at it an' all. Dirty buggers. But that Kirsty Young's tasty. Wouldn't mind giving her some news to report. Know what I mean? Woaaar!

lavinia said...

At last an Arcati Ball to raise funds for your big war chest!

cadbury egg said...

Walter Ellis, I think you're right when you say that "they're all at it". The majority of people do actually have affairs. I must admit that I have not actually physically witnessed Snow and Williams having sexual intercourse. However, I have friends in common with Snow and all I will say is that while the Mail on Sunday may have exaggerated, Snow is apparently lying in saying he never met the woman. Obviously Snow and Williams's sex lives are their business. Until they are written about extensively in national newspapers that is.

Duralex said...

Seems to me that the abnormal thing is that the journalists' intimate lives are written about extensively in national newspapers. Is there an epidemic of cannibalism amongst the hacks in the UK ?

precious said...

Huh?

Duralex said...

Well, if this is really Precious Williams speaking, I apologize for the word "cannibalism", which was not at all meant to hurt her, since it seems she's a victim of that unbelievable internal war and moral crusade (as Walter Ellis said).
As a foreigner, the least I can do is express my amazement... and it's also the most. Therefore I won't go any further.

Anonymous said...

"Kate Adie Doesn't Like Blogs"

By Iain Dale(Iain Dale)

Jon Snow said on THIS WEEK last night that for the first time journalists like him are being critiqued, and they don't like it....

MrCurious said...

Clever use of words by Snow. He "doesn't know any lady called Precious Williams" is very different from he doesn't know the lady in question.
The MoS blundered in not checking out or putting themselves in a position to prove their story. But insiders at the paper believe Snow was desperate to kill the allegations over drugs, but couldn't believe his luck when the quivering editor Peter Wright caved in over the shagging as well. If Snow is Snow White, why doesn't he say he doesn't "know the woman in question?" Lucky for him that Williams is in on the conspiracy

Anonymous said...

Mr Curious:

If MoS execs know that Snow is probably lying about the shagging element, why are they now trying to label Williams, who has by all accounts written extensively for their very own paper without problems, a 'fantasist'? And what do you mean about Williams being 'in on the conspiracy'? A conspiracy to bring Jon Snow down? A conspiracy to ridicule the Mail on Sunday?

Anonymous said...

Have to agree that Snow's comments have been suspect throughout. The MoS gave Snow ample time to defend himself prior to the two articles being published. But what did Snow say? "It doesn't ring a bell." "I don't talk about this stuff" and then "I'm not prepared to have any conversation about this."

Only when drug allegations entered the equation did Snow suddenly begin claiming that he'd never met the woman. Why didn't he clearly state right from the start that he didn't know her if his current protestations are to be believed?

Think about it. A person with nothing to hide would have immediately said, "I've never met any such person" and not "I'm not prepared to have any discussion about this."

stephanie said...

..me thinks: Mr. Snow, doth protest too much"? hmmmm

Anonymous said...

Hoax.

Shit For Brains said...

I don't understand!

Anonymous said...

The self-claimng Stephanie will understand. This is a parenthesis, anyway, don't pay attention.

J M said...

Madam Arcati, I keep trying to email you privately but I don't think my emails are coming through. I have some emails that show the Mail on Sunday were still working on proving their story just before going to press with that apology. I had some information for them but didnt get it to them in time. It looks like they apologised to Snow out of desperation and not because they believed him.

Arcati said...

Dear JM - My email is Madamearcati69@aol.com, testing fine, but avoid Outlook Express.