September 5th, 2013

Claire Perry Concedes Guido Didn’t “Sponsor” Hacking

Guido can now happily report that Tory MP Claire Perry has backed down after her bizarre claim that Guido ‘sponsored’ hacking pranksters who uploaded hardcore images onto the anti-porn campaigner’s website. Perry has conceded:

“For the purpose of clarity, I have never stated or indeed believe that you organised the hacking and am quite happy to make that view public.”

The government internet adviser’s offending tweets claiming that Guido sponsored the hacking have now been deleted after Guido’s lawyers demanded that she remove them and withdraw the crazy and technologically illiterate claims which she had made.

Guido would once again like to thank the team at Griffin Law for their work…


  1. 1
    Kulgan of Crydee says:

    Is she paying Guido’s legal costs? Or I suppose, is the taxpayer paying Guido’s legal costs?


  2. 2
    MI5 says:

    So Griffin Law are presentable are they?

    Nice to know…

    Difficult to find lawyers in London who are not bent…


  3. 3
    Mike Litorus says:

    Still would though.


  4. 4
    Carry Hole is a porcine homunculus says:

    UK ‘to spunk taxpayers cash’ on aid for Al Q in Syria.


  5. 6
    Jack says:

    Could you propose to Grffin Law the possibility of filing crimnal action against these law firms which threaten us and try and extort money from us for telling the truth?

    Could they establish the precdent sometime that harassment and attempted extortion of funds by London solicitors for our telling the truth is a criminal activity?

    That would advance the cause of freedom of expression greatly and take these abusive bums down a peg or two…

    I threatened such a firm last year with filing an action in a criminal court against them…there are one or two cases but not enough precedent yet…

    Never heard a pipseak from the criminals again…


  6. 7
    Harry the Bastard says:

    Thank god neither party got their kit off!!!


  7. 9
    Blue Peter Goldfish says:

    * innocent face *


  8. 12
    WSC says:

    In victory, magnanimity…


  9. 13
  10. 14
    Casual Observer says:

    Congrats and kudos to Guido.


  11. 15
    Anonymous says:

    She will get her tits out as compo….


  12. 16
    Marmite Soldier says:

    I still think that “I have never stated … that you organised the hacking” is bending the boundaries of truth somewhat bearing in mind her original tweets, but I would imagine that this is the nearest that she will do to a proper admission of fault and an apology.


  13. 17
    C Perry's Original Tweet says:

    “Apologies to anyone affected by the hacking of my website sponsored by @GuidoFawkes….”


  14. 20
    Jimmy says:

    So just to recap

    1. Guido boasts about suing Perry
    2. Guido is not in fact going to sue Perry. Imagine my surprise.
    3. In Guidoworld this constitutes Perry backing down.

    Number of legal actions threatened by Guido so far: 94 (DWP estimate)
    Number actually commenced: 0


    • 24
      I used to support Labour but I grew up says:

      Number of jobs Jimmy’s applied for since losing his disability bennies: 14
      Number of those Jimmy was actually suitable for: 0
      Number of bennies Jimmy’s little grasping hands still clings on to: ?


    • 29
      Annifrid Lyngstad says:

      And how coud I ever refuse?
      I feel like I win when I lose.


      • 54
        10.4 highway patrol says:

        the winner takes it all annie . ….as you well know sitting in the middle of your private island … or is that agnethe.


    • 42

      This shows more naivety than Guido would expect from you, if your lawyers get what you want without going to Court that is a good victory.


      • 50
        Jimmy says:

        So you didn’t want an apology or damages or costs you just wanted her to deny libelling you? Again?

        I suppose the important thing is that you’re happy. I imagine for Ms. Perry the sting of defeat will soon pass too.


        • 63

          You’re gutted she complied aren’t you?


          • Jimmy says:

            Complied with what? She denied libelling you six weeks ago and now she’s denied it again. Are you going to ask her her in another six weeks if she still denies it just to be sure?


          • She deleted the tweets making the allegations. She stated clearly that she didn’t mean to suggest Guido was responsible and, err, Guido is still a Sun columnist. She didn’t come out of the tussle with her reputation enhanced did she? Maybe to you that is a terrible defeat for Guido. In truth, no doubt we would all have liked to see her sing an apology like Clegg whilst dancing around in nipple tassles, but, hey, we can’t have everything.


          • Anonymous says:

            Not a terrible defeat but hardly a victory when what conceded occurred 6 weeks ago.

            Nipple tassles would have been good.


    • 44
      Maq­boul says:

      Usually the threat of legal force, 99 times out of 100, achieves the desired result as it appeared to do in this case.


    • 61
      M'Learned Friend says:

      It was all an obvious try on. To sustain a claim for defamation you would have to prove that your reputation has been damaged. That raises two interesting questions:
      1. Whether anyone would have paid any attention whatsoever to the nonsense spouted by La Perry. Since, in Guido’s view (which is probably shared by the world) La Perry’s tweets were obviously crazy and technologically illierate, the answer to that question could only have been “no”. So no claim for that reason.
      2. Would Guido’s reputation have been damaged even if people had paid any heed to La Perry? Possibly only if he had taken himself too seriously by pursuing the matter further, since people might then (wrongly) have assumed that Guido was a rather pompous fellow who enjoys dishing it out but doesn’t like getting any in return.

      In the meantime, well-done to Guido for republishing (above) the content of the allegedly offending tweets.

      Time to visit El Vino’s methinks …


      • 65
        Jimmy says:

        3. What reputation?

        “In the meantime, well-done to Guido for republishing (above) the content of the allegedly offending tweets.”

        Noticed that. They’re also referenced on the original post which links to at least one other site hosting them. On the other hand, and let’s be fair, Blaney did get a six week old tweet deleted, so that’s money well spent. Anyone who wants a vintage tweet deleted, and feels too shy just to ask, the firm’s link is in the OP.


  15. 21
    Brent Fraser says:

    Sorry seems to be the hardest word


  16. 23
    Sweet f*cking Christ on a bike says:

    “The government internet adviser’s .. technologically illiterate claims”

    Positive discrimination strikes again..


  17. 25
    I d on't n eed no d octor says:

    But Guido has backed down. From Guido’s bluster I thought he was going to sue Perry.


  18. 28
    Fuck the LibLabCon says:

    I would.


  19. 31
    Henry IX says:

    Show us your duckies Lady Claire.


  20. 32
    Displaced Brummie says:

    Or to put it another way, she did state it but did not mean what she stated, as she did not know what she was talking about.

    So in this instance, ignorance is a defence.

    “Just because you break up with someone, you don’t stop loving them…” Errr. right…

    And there was nobody else involved. Of course! Some people just movfe on very, very quickly.

    Claire Perry has an over active interest in the sex lives of others. Displacement activity, perhaps?


    • 53
      Teasy weasy says:

      Is “displacement” a polite way of saying “goes like a fucking train”?


    • 73
      Anonymous says:

      That first article explains a lot – clearly she’s far too busy for her own kids, preferring to pack them off as boarders, so she wants to interfere in how other people bring their offspring up.

      Talk about over compensating.


  21. 33
    Captain Wales says:

    Those teeth could give one a nasty little nibble, dontcha think?


  22. 34
    Mumsnet says:

    Claire ! How could you ?!?


  23. 35
    Fido the Doggy Stylist says:

    Woof Woof !!!


  24. 38
    Witty Moniker says:

    “For the purpose of clarity”? B*ll*x. For the purpose of having calmed down, and not making an even bigger idiot of herself and not getting sued.


  25. 49
    Anonymous says:

    Best thing would be to sue her for something anyway.

    After all, she’s a tory. And a thick bird.


    • 57
      10.4 highway patrol says:

      who is this new voice on the singing firmament called robin THICKE ?

      which agent thought up that stage name ?

      though i hear he s earning shedloads so perhaps the agent was prescient after


  26. 62
    Old Blue Eyes says:

    Hey Guido, why is she not tagged as “totty watch”.


  27. 76
    Penfold says:

    “”” I have never stated”””

    Well, if that is true, why sic the legal dawgs on her.?

    Is she being economical with her apology?
    If so, it’s not an apology…..


  28. 78
    superman says:

    More money for the lawyers! We didn’t believe her. She is a Tory MP. Why waste money?


  29. 79
  30. 80
    gildedtumbril says:

    I detest lawyers. I have actually met two who were honest.
    I confess, I like the name Griffin Law. I am not sure why…


  31. 81
    BedroomSilk says:

    The original tweets from the Rt Hon Claire Perry may be bullshit and they may also be deleted but they are still not invisible or evaporated. M’learned friends have plenty to go on.


Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives

Subscribe me to:


AddThis Feed Button

Guido Reads

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,645 other followers