‘Last-chance saloon’ for TV doctor accused of Foster libel
CELEBRITY doctor Christian Jessen is to be offered a ‘last-chance saloon’ opportunity to prove his credibility in a defamation case taken by Northern Ireland’s First Minister, a judge has said.
Arlene Foster is suing Dr Jessen over a tweet he posted in December 2019 making an unfounded claim that she was having an extramarital affair.
A key issue in the case is the TV doctor’s repeated failure to engage in the legal process and respond to papers served on him by Ms Foster’s representatives.
The doctor, best known for appearing in Channel 4’s Embarrassing Bodies, belatedly engaged with the legal proceedings last week, after Ms Foster had already given evidence to the court.
He claimed he had been previously unaware the case at the Belfast High Court was happening.
During three hours in the witness box last Friday, the doctor was pressed repeatedly on his claims that he had not received certain legal papers. Offering an explanation, the doctor said he was suffering from mental health problems at the outset of 2020 and had stopped working and moved home to his parents.
Ahead of ruling on the wider defamation claim, Judge Gerry McAlinden told a review hearing yesterday that he was to make a determination on whether Dr Jessen was being truthful in contending he did not receive the papers.
The judge agreed to a request from the medic’s counsel, Gavin Millar QC, to receive submissions as to his client’s credibility.
‘This is an important aspect of the case, this is the last-chance saloon for Dr Jessen,’ said Judge McAlinden. ‘If it’s a case where he loses his opportunity to belatedly defend this action on the credibility point, then I think it’s important that all opportunities are given to him and his representatives to make points in his favour.’ The judge added: ‘Dr Jessen’s representatives wish to make submissions and I’m certainly not going to deprive them of that opportunity in respect of that important issue.’
Dr Jessen’s lawyers have been given until May 4 to lodge written submissions on the credibility issue, with Ms Foster’s representatives given until May 10 to respond to those. A hearing has been scheduled for May 14 for the two sides to make oral submissions on the matter.
At yesterday’s short review hearing, both legal parties indicated that they did not intend to call any further evidence or witnesses in the case. Mr Millar also said he would not be seeking to cross-examine any evidence already presented to the court by Ms Foster’s legal team prior to Dr Jessen engaging in the case.
Dr Jessen earlier said he posted false rumours that Ms Foster was having an affair to expose any possible hypocrisy.
He told the High Court in Belfast that he didn’t want to cause Ms Foster ‘any distress’ when he tweeted an unsubstantiated rumour of an extramarital affair.
He admitted that the tweet, posted in December 2019, would have been ‘unpleasant’ for her.
The TV presenter said he posted the tweet based on rumours he read about on social media.
The rumour was based on an allegation she had an affair with a close protection officer.
‘There was extensive online comments about this rumour,’ Dr Jessen told the court. ‘It seems too prolifically talked about to have been conjured from thin air.’
Dr Jessen was questioned about the basis of his tweet by David Ringland QC, acting for Ms Foster. Mr Ringland asked the doctor why he tweeted the ‘disgusting’ falsehood about the DUP leader.
The defence barrister accused him of ‘trashing’ her reputation.
Dr Jessen told the court he wanted to highlight ‘possible hypocrisy behind it’, referring to the Democratic Unionist Party’s position on same-sex marriage and abortion.
‘What I had presented to me, from the myriad of corners from which I was seeing this same rumour repeated, that I could conclude that [it] was not false,’ the openly gay doctor added.
‘My issue was more the possible hypocrisy behind it. Given the extent of the rumours and given the DUP’s stance on things like equal marriage and abortion, I felt strongly that if there was a possibility that these were true, this is a public figure that was answerable to her public.
‘If there were any truth to these, that hypocrisy needs to be pointed out and accounted for.’
Mr Ringland put it to Dr Jessen that he posted the allegation to his 300,000 followers based on rumours that were ‘possibly true’. ‘Do you understand how shattering and damaging it is for a happily married woman to be accused of adultery?’ he added. Dr Jessen replied: ‘I’m sure it was very unpleasant for her and I would not wish to cause her any distress.’
‘I won’t deprive them of that’ ‘I’m sure it was very unpleasant’