.
ER Editor: This case is five and a half years old. Why this, why now? Excellent news nonetheless.
Harcombe/Kendrick vs Associated Newspapers…
I’m delighted to say it’s finally over!
5.5 years after the articles were published, they are down and an apology has been made.
Thank you SO much to everyone who made this even possible – especially Claire & Dominic at Carter-Ruck… pic.twitter.com/uILhUXy5br— Dr Zoe Harcombe, PhD (@zoeharcombe) October 13, 2024
A hard fought battle won decisively by @zoeharcombe, Malcolm Kendrick and their team. A win for academic freedom to dissent without unfounded accusations of dishonesty. And for people’s right to make their own, informed, judgements on their treatment.https://t.co/Y1EIWFITSm pic.twitter.com/7KyeYj5stY
— Francis Hoar (@Francis_Hoar) October 13, 2024
These doctors should never have been attacked by the Mail.
They should never have had to pursue this in court.
It should never have taken over 5 years.
Thank goodness a few have the determination to fight such lies. https://t.co/9h9X42yBnR pic.twitter.com/kJgJDj6iMB
— Dr Clare Craig (@ClareCraigPath) October 13, 2024
Mega congrats to Dr. Zoe Harcombe and Dr. Malcolm Kendrick! Statins have pathetic benefits and many nasty side effects. They were attacked for calling some of this this out, and now the lamestream media has to APOLOGISE and pay them damages 👍 https://t.co/Dc0BLYz9ui
— Ivor Cummins (@FatEmperor) October 13, 2024
********
BREAKING: Doctors win libel case against British tabloid
Associated Newspapers Ltd will now pay “substantial damages and costs” and apologise for defaming two doctors.

Further, Calman’s article inappropriately branded the two doctors as dishonest brokers, who were focused on the business of selling books that downplay the role of cholesterol in heart disease.

Calman and his publishers refused to apologise, remove or alter the offending articles which were published in March 2019, so Kendrick and Harcombe sued for libel arguing the articles “caused serious harm” to their reputations.
Calman and his publishers claimed the articles were “honest opinion” published in the public interest, and therefore protected under the Defamation Act 2013. But Justice Matthew Nicklin denied them a public interest defence in June 2024.
Since then, the publishers decided not to appeal the decision.
Today, the Mail Online issued an apology to Kendrick and Harcombe, conceding that the allegations it printed were “untrue and ought not to have been published.”
It added, “We are happy to set the record straight, and apologise to Dr Harcombe and Dr Kendrick for the distress caused. We will not repeat the allegations and have agreed to pay substantial damages and costs.”
In response to the announcement, Dr Zoë Harcombe said, “I’m delighted to say it’s finally over. Malcolm and I are so grateful to those who made this possible – especially our legal team Claire & Dominic at Carter-Ruck and Adrienne & Godwin at 5RB.”
The offending articles have been removed from the website. The case serves as a stark warning to journalists who use their platform to try and discredit those who challenge orthodoxy.
See the full apology (below).

Source
************

••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.



Leave a Reply