BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Switchboard >

Michael Barrymore, the press, and perspective

  
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
09:46 / 13.09.02
Okay. Last night, at work, the front page of today's Daily Mail was a big picture of Michael Barrymore. Fair enough... it's a big story, and the kind their readers will be interested in.

What interested me, however, was the fact that above the picture, they had a sub-headline (sorry- didn't manage to grab a copy, and the first edition's gonna have been updated on their website now, so bear with me) to the effect that "shamed comedian exploits legal loophole".

On reading the article, he'd just invoked the right to remain silent, and, under English law, is allowed not to incriminate himself.

NOW... I always thought that was a fundamental part of the English justice system... not at all a "legal loophole". In fact, I was quite shocked (though, it being the Mail, not surprised) that they could even get away with using such a term.

Strange thing is, when the late editions turned up, that line was missing entirely.

Do you think the Mail have had a change of heart? A word from lawyers?

(BTW- I'm not asking anyone's opinion on the actual case here- just the principles involved.)
 
 
William Sack
10:28 / 13.09.02
Quite possibly a word from the lawyers. The privelige against self-incrimination is indeed a fundamental part fo the Engish justice system and not a mere technicality, as was the right to silence in criminal proceedings until it was eroded recently (to put us on a legal par with about 2 or 3 other legal systems in the world). "Shamed comedian exploits legal loophole" has different connotations from "unfortunate but well-loved entertainer exercises fundamental legal privelige" and might do 2 things which would worry the lawyers: 1) it might raise the innuendo that his silence is probative of wrongdoing, and might open up a big libel case, and 2) might be construed in the future as a statement which could prejudice any possible criminal proceedings which might arise from the investigation into Mr Lubbock's death.
My knee-jerk reaction when I read your post was that this discarded byline was a disgrace. However, Barrymore is doing exactly the same thing as the Stephen Lawrence suspects at that coroner's inquest. "Swaggering Racists Exploit Legal Loophole" wouldn't worry me at all. Sometimes I'm comfortable with my hypocrisy.
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
13:04 / 13.09.02
Ever since he came (or was forced out) Barrymore's relationship with the papers seems to have veered between 'he's a poof! burn him! burn him!' and 'Isn't he a funny bloke? By the way, did you know he was gay?'
 
 
Bill Posters
13:53 / 13.09.02
Can I make my by now traditional 'fisting by the pool' joke, or would that be in very poor taste indeed?
 
 
doglikesparky
16:55 / 15.09.02
It being a few days ago now and me having a memory like a thing with a not very good memory I'm not sure if it was the same issue or not but the Mail also, whilst reporting on Barrymore, went with the Sub-headline something along the lines of "Barrymore's nights of sordid gay sex and drug abuse!"

Is it just me or does this suggest the Mail think gay sex is sordid? Obviously we know the answer here, I'm not really looking for a response.
 
 
w1rebaby
19:23 / 15.09.02
Presumably as opposed to decorous gay sex and drug abuse, the sort of thing Oscar Wilde might engage in.
 
 
_pin
22:12 / 15.09.02
As a side note., did any one notice how the guy's family just seemed to spend the whole thing saying how he ABSOLUTLY WASN'T GAY AT ALL. He even shouting "Fucking perverts" once when Queer As Folk was on. And he LOVED ladies. They'd even go so far as to call him a womaniser. And he loved flirting too.

Right. That totally proves everything. Well done that family. What were they hoping to achive?
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
16:34 / 16.09.02
Well, Peter Mandelson's boyfriend isn't gay either, according to his family...
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
09:14 / 17.09.02
fridge- surely Oscar Wilde wouldn't have indulged in any kind of gay sex. I mean, he had kids! On the Lubbock scale, that makes him hetero for life... and I don't believe what people say about him!

On a slightly more serious note, the "fucking perverts" line does tend to make me feel a teensy bit less sorry for the dead guy...
 
 
Sax
10:40 / 17.09.02
Well, there is that old chestnut about not visiting the sins of the father on the dead bloke or something...
 
 
The Natural Way
11:10 / 17.09.02
Has anyone seen the '"Real" Michael Barrymore' trailer....now that sickens me. Fucking sinister music...bastardshitheadwankers....
 
 
Bill Posters
13:53 / 17.09.02
What were they hoping to achive?

Weeeel, homophobes they may be, but the less gay he was, the less likely he was to have consented to the rogering he got from a blunt object and the more likely it is that things were far from "awight" that night. So his orientation is kinda relevant to the enquiry.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
16:07 / 17.09.02
Yes. Because homosexuals just *love* violent sexual assaults. Could be a rolling pin, could be a marlin, as long as it's up the arse they just don't care.

Meanwhile...on the right not to self-incriminate - Michael Mansfield, who has been advising Barrymore, was asked about the Lawrence case and its comparative nature, and argued fairly convincingly that BArrymore was exercising a legal right, specifically in this case not to answer questions which might have led to an admission of Cocaine use (which you'd think would be the least fo his worries right now), whereas the decision by the accused in the Lawrence trial to say nothing at all except for their names under cover of the same law *was* using it as a loophole to abuse due process.

Sounds convincing to me, but then it would, wouldn't it?
 
 
Bill Posters
16:27 / 17.09.02
Yes. Because homosexuals just *love* violent sexual assaults. Could be a rolling pin, could be a marlin, as long as it's up the arse they just don't care.

That's not what I meant and you know it you fucking gypsy.
 
 
w1rebaby
18:04 / 17.09.02
Potentially interestingly, I used to work in Harlow, the town where the nightclub Mr Barrymore visited is located (Millenniums, a squalid meat market, now closed I think). I was talking to a cab driver who happened to be around there at the time when he came in to the police station.

When they'd decided to take him in for questioning, they called him up and said "we're coming to pick you up", and he said "no, I'll come down myself, I don't want to get publicity on this, I'll come in voluntarily". When he turned up at the police station, the press were there, and despite the fact that he was offering no resistance the police took him out of the car, cuffed him and dragged him into the station. No doubt stopping along the way to make sure the papers got some good shots.
 
 
William Sack
20:11 / 17.09.02
No doubt stopping along the way to make sure the papers got some good shots.

I'm sorry, but is anyone else thinking "marlins" here?


More seriously. I can see the distinction that Michael Mansfield would make, but it's a fine one. A wholesale resusal to answer any questions at all might indicate indicate an intention to give no help to the inquest whatsoever, whereas Barrymore confined his silence to one particular line of questioning. It's interesting to see that Michael Mansfield is counsel for the defence in the courtroom of the media though, and being obliged to defend himself as well, from the sounds of it.
 
  
Add Your Reply