Connect with us

Latest Stories

Meghan Markle to pay £67,000 legal costs after losing the first round of legal battle against Mail

Published

on

meghan markle to pay 67000 legal costs after losing the first round of legal battle against mail

Meghan Markle has agreed to pay £67,000 in legal costs after losing the first round of her battle against the Mail on Sunday’s publisher.

The duchess is suing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), publisher of the newspaper and MailOnline, over an article published in February 2019 which reproduced parts of a handwritten letter she sent to her father.

But in May, the High Court’s Mr Justice Warby struck out parts of the Meghan’s claim, including allegations of ‘deliberately stirring up’ issues between her and her father.

A written submission from July 22 has since shown that the duchess has agreed to pay in full the publisher’s costs for the strike-out hearing of £67,888.

The hefty bill was revealed as the court heard Meghan believes naming the five female friends who briefed People magazine about her and a letter sent to her father Thomas would be an ‘unacceptable price to pay’ for pursuing a claim against Associated Newspapers.

The Duchess of Sussex has applied for an order to keep secret the identities of the women, all ‘young mothers’, at a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

Today a skeleton argument presented to the court by Meghan’s legal team said: ‘To disclose their identities to the public at this stage is an unacceptable price to pay for the right to pursue her claim for invasion of privacy’.

Meghan Markle (pictured with Prince Harry in October 2018) have asked for a High Court order to stop anyone from naming her five female friends who briefed People magazine

Meghan Markle (pictured with Prince Harry in October 2018) have asked for a High Court order to stop anyone from naming her five female friends who briefed People magazine

Meghan Markle (pictured with Prince Harry in October 2018) have asked for a High Court order to stop anyone from naming her five female friends who briefed People magazine 

But in an embarrassing moment during the application Meghan’s QC Justin Rushbrooke accidentally said the surname of one of the five friends the Duchess of Sussex is seeking to keep anonymous.

Judge Mr Justice Warby, who is expected to rule on the matter in August, immediately directed that the individual’s name was not to be reported.

The five women were named as the sources of a People Magazine article in 2019 in legal papers submitted by Meghan to the court earlier this month, although their identities were not made public.

The People article lies at the heart of her privacy and copyright case against the Mail on Sunday because it was the first time the existence of a letter the Duchess had written to her father Thomas was revealed.

In response Antony White, QC for Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline, told the court that the principle of open justice in Britain means the five friends should be named. Mr White also said Meghan was apparently ‘pleased … with her friends’ intervention’ in speaking to People magazine, apart from the reference to the letter she wrote to her estranged father.

Who are Meghan’s five friends who briefed People magazine? 

The five friends, described as ‘young mothers’, have never been named. 

What little information there is came from People magazine, who referred to them as ‘Meghan’s inner circle’.

The first was ‘a longtime friend’ of Meghan, the second was referred to as ‘a former co-star’, the third ‘a friend from LA’, the fourth is described as ‘a onetime colleague’ with the fifth described as ‘a close confidante’.  

Earlier this month Meghan gave away that the friends were all women in her witness statement related to today’s order application.

Revealing they all had children she said: ‘Each of these women is a private citizen, young mother, and each has a basic right to privacy’. 

Advertisement

He said: ‘There is no proper evidential basis (for the application). There is no evidence at all from four of the five friends and the evidence from the fifth (Friend B) has been shown to be unsatisfactory.’

Mr White said: ‘There is no risk of reprisal in this case.’ The barrister added: ‘The information they disclosed to People was information about the claimant, but is not said by her to be private or information that she seeks to protect.’

The Mail On Sunday claims that revelations in People and the misleading impression it gave of the letter gave Thomas Markle the right to publish more of the handwritten note in the newspaper to defend himself after their relationship became hopelessly estranged in the wake of Meghan’s marriage to Harry in May 2018.

But Meghan insists that she had no idea any of her friends had spoken to People magazine until after the fact.

All five of the women face the prospect of being hauled to the High Court in London next year to testify in the explosive privacy trial. They could be asked to confirm on oath whether the Duchess had no prior knowledge that they were going to speak to People.

Neither Meghan nor Harry attended the hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in London today.

ANL’s lawyers are resisting the application to keep the identities of Meghan’s friends secret, claiming the duchess’s friends brought the letter into the public domain when it was referred to for the first time in the People interview.

In written submissions, Antony White QC, acting for ANL, said: ‘The friends are important potential witnesses on a key issue.

‘Reporting these matters without referring to names would be a heavy curtailment of the media’s and the defendant’s entitlement to report this case and the public’s right to know about it.

‘No friend’s oral evidence could be fully and properly reported because full reporting might identify her, especially as there has already been media speculation as to their identities.’

Mr White also said the present order sought by the duchess’s lawyers would leave Meghan entitled to disclose the identities to anyone – including the media – who could publish it, while ANL’s titles would remain barred from doing so.

Meghan’s barrister Justin Rushbrooke QC said Meghan’s five friends were entitled to ‘a very high level of super-charged right of confidentiality’ and confidential journalistic sources.

He claimed ‘there is ample evidence before the court’ to support his client’s application to maintain the anonymity of her five friends.

He said: ‘We say at least four of the five sources have no real role at all on the issue raised by the defendant’s defence regarding the interview with People magazine in the US.’ 

Thomas Markle spoke to the Mail on Sunday and shared the letter from his daughter after the friends spoke to People magazine to 'defend himself' - the evidence of the group of five women is at the centre of the High Court battle

Thomas Markle spoke to the Mail on Sunday and shared the letter from his daughter after the friends spoke to People magazine to 'defend himself' - the evidence of the group of five women is at the centre of the High Court battle

Thomas Markle spoke to the Mail on Sunday and shared the letter from his daughter after the friends spoke to People magazine to ‘defend himself’ – the evidence of the group of five women is at the centre of the High Court battle 

He added that one of the five, known only as Friend B, had provided a witness statement to the court in support of the application.

Mr Rushbrooke said Friend B was ‘the best possible person’ to provide evidence as ‘she is the one who actually orchestrated the interviews’.

He told the court: ‘These were confidential sources who gave the interviews on condition of anonymity.’

He also said: ‘The defendant, in its own coverage – going right back to the first article… that gave rise to this entire litigation – they themselves describe the interviews as anonymous.

‘When they regaled their readers with a long and sensational article online within hours of the document being served upon them, they themselves described the interviews as anonymous and the names of the five friends as being put into a confidential court document. But, within hours, we find a volte face.’

The five friends had decided to ‘help’ by giving interviews anonymously to People magazine, which has 35million readers worldwide. Meghan insists she knew nothing about it

The five friends had decided to ‘help’ by giving interviews anonymously to People magazine, which has 35million readers worldwide. Meghan insists she knew nothing about it

The five friends had decided to ‘help’ by giving interviews anonymously to People magazine, which has 35million readers worldwide. Meghan insists she knew nothing about it

Mr Rushbrooke QC then told the court that MailOnline published an article on July 1, the day after the confidential schedule containing her five friends’ names was served on MailOnline’s publisher Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).

Mr Rushbrooke said the article was published just before 5pm, adding: ‘If they got it at midnight, journalists were no doubt poring over it with glee in the morning.’

He said it was a ‘massively long article which in its own sub-headline records, we say, accurately that … ‘Meghan has now identified the five friends, who spoke anonymously, naming them in confidential papers’.

Mr Rushbrooke said MailOnline published another article on Meghan’s application shortly after the first one.

He said: ‘Let there be no doubt about it, these two publications are what set off the chain reaction of other publicity given by other organs to the response. It could not possibly be suggested otherwise.’

Mr Rushbrooke added: ‘It was the defendant and only the defendant because only the defendant had the document which started the wildfire.’

He continued: ‘Other litigants do not make commercial fodder out of the other side’s pleadings, but since this one does and since this one has asserted in correspondence that this very document is properly reportable by the media – although they graciously said they won’t publish it until the outcome of today’s hearing – that is precisely why we say an order … is necessary’.

Mr Justice Warby said he will give his decision on the duchess’s application in writing at a later date.

He said he was ‘not going to make any predictions’ as to when that would be, but that he would deliver his ruling as soon as he can.

In People’s bombshell February 2019 interview, the five women, who were described by the magazine as ‘a special sisterhood’, lavished praise on Meghan.

Judge Mr Justice Warby

Judge Mr Justice Warby

Meghan Markle's QC Justin Rushbrooke

Meghan Markle's QC Justin Rushbrooke

Judge Mr Justice Warby (left) will decide whether the names of Meghan Markle’s five ‘young mother friends’ who briefed People magazine will be made public. Meghan’s QC Justin Rushbrooke accidentally said the surname of one of the five friends the Duchess of Sussex is seeking to keep anonymous in the High Court today

One of them – identified in court papers by Meghan as ‘Friend A’ – told the world about the letter she had posted to her father in October 2018.

Thomas Markle said he spoke to Mail on Sunday afterwards – and shared the note – to ‘defend himself’ against an inaccurate portrayal of him in People.

Meghan named her five friends to the High Court in a confidential schedule which was kept secret. In a public document she named them as Friends A to E. They cannot be named

She identified Friend A as the one who had told People that the letter had said: ‘Dad, I’m so heartbroken. I love you. I have one father. Please stop victimising me through the media so we can repair our relationship.’

Meghan claimed this was an ‘unfortunately inaccurate’ portrayal of her letter, stressing numerous times that she had known nothing of her closest friends’ decision to go public.

She disclosed a list of those she had discussed the ‘private’ letter with in the papers lodged with the High Court – two of her friends, Prince Harry, her mother Doria Ragland, the press team at Kensington Palace (KP), and her solicitor.

Her lawyers told the High Court she had told ‘some of her friends’ about the fact she had sent a letter, adding that she had also ‘discussed the contents of the letter with her husband, her mother, Friends A and C, the KP Communications Team and her solicitor’.

Meghan insisted more than a dozen times in last week’s legal document that she had no prior knowledge of her friends’ interview with People.

She added that she was so uninvolved in ‘the process of the People article’ that she only found out about it on the day it was published’.

Powered by: Daily Mail

Latest Stories

Dennis Nilsen’s final victims… as he rotted in jail: The shy hero who helped convict the killer

Published

on

By

dennis nilsens final victims as he rotted in jail the shy hero who helped convict the killer

Julie Bentley’s heart contracted with sadness and grief as she watched this week’s final episode of the acclaimed ITV drama Des, about one of Britain’s worst serial killers Dennis Nilsen.

Like millions of viewers, she already knew the horrific story of the bespectacled, unassuming job-centre supervisor who secretly preyed on young men, mostly gay, luring them back to his London flat, where he strangled and then butchered them.

A former paralegal, she’d read the book on which the drama was based — Killing For Company by Brian Masters — and knew every grisly detail of the five-year killing spree, from 1978 to 1983, during which Nilsen murdered at least 12 men.

Julie felt for every one of his victims, but the tears fell as the drama centred on the poignant and eloquent testimony of young drag artist Carl Stotter, one of Nilsen’s very few survivors, whose evidence helped to convict him.

For Carl Stotter was the big brother Julie idolised as a child. 

Carl Stotter, pictured aged 18, was one of serial killer Dennis Nilsen¿s very few survivors, whose evidence helped to convict him however, alcoholism eventually killed him 30 years after his attempted murder

Carl Stotter, pictured aged 18, was one of serial killer Dennis Nilsen¿s very few survivors, whose evidence helped to convict him however, alcoholism eventually killed him 30 years after his attempted murder

Carl Stotter, pictured aged 18, was one of serial killer Dennis Nilsen’s very few survivors, whose evidence helped to convict him however, alcoholism eventually killed him 30 years after his attempted murder

She was only nine when Nilsen was jailed for life at his 1983 trial at the Old Bailey. 

She remembers her father burning newspapers at home before she could read them, to shield her from the horror of it all.

As she watched actor Laurie Kynaston perfectly capture Carl’s vulnerability, she wept for the brother she’d lost to alcoholism — which eventually killed him 30 years after his attempted murder — and for the ordeal he’d been through,

‘At first I thought he was helping me,’ Carl told the court, describing how he woke from a drunken sleep to hear Nilsen whispering “Keep still” as the zip of his sleeping bag tightened around his neck.

Passing out, he came round in a bath with Nilsen trying to drown him.  

‘I thought to myself, “You are being murdered by this man, this is what it feels like to die”.’

Why Nilsen then revived him, later walking him — badly injured and disorientated — to a Tube station, Carl had no idea. 

‘That’s what I don’t understand,’ he said, trembling under Nilsen’s cold gaze from the dock. ‘Is he my murderer or my saviour?’

Today, Julie would like to answer that question. ‘Dennis Nilsen murdered my brother and completely destroyed my family,’ says the 46-year-old divorced mother-of-three.

‘That question haunted Carl his whole life. Why did Nilsen let him live, but not the others? He even wrote to Nilsen in prison to ask him, but he never bothered to reply.

‘Nilsen may not have killed his body that night, but he killed the Carl I knew and idolised as a child. He ended up in a worse hell than Nilsen, and a prison of his own.’

Carl Stotter’s family have never spoken before, but Julie wants to tell the tragic untold story of what happened to Nilsen’s most high-profile survivor.

Carl was found dead in his Brighton council flat on January 1, 2013; his body had lain undiscovered since Christmas. 

He’d fallen into a diabetic coma, having struggled with alcoholism ever since the trial. He was 52.

Murderer: Dennis Nilson (pictured) carried out a five-year killing spree, from 1978 to 1983, during which Nilsen murdered at least 12 men. He secretly preyed on young men, mostly gay, luring them back to his London flat, where he strangled and then butchered them

Murderer: Dennis Nilson (pictured) carried out a five-year killing spree, from 1978 to 1983, during which Nilsen murdered at least 12 men. He secretly preyed on young men, mostly gay, luring them back to his London flat, where he strangled and then butchered them

Murderer: Dennis Nilson (pictured) carried out a five-year killing spree, from 1978 to 1983, during which Nilsen murdered at least 12 men. He secretly preyed on young men, mostly gay, luring them back to his London flat, where he strangled and then butchered them

And Julie also blames Nilsen for the suicide of her eldest son Jack, 19, three years ago — indirectly yet another of his victims.

Depressed and drinking heavily after breaking up with a girlfriend, Jack killed himself, leaving a letter for his mother saying he ‘didn’t want to end up like Uncle Carl’.

‘The Carl we knew and loved died the day Nilsen attacked him,’ says Julie. ‘If that hadn’t happened, Carl could have had a happy life, my children could have had a loving relationship with their uncle, and perhaps my son would still be alive today.’

Carl Stotter was the eldest of four children, born in High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire to a builder father and a mother who worked in electronics. 

Julie, the baby of the family, was 13 years younger than him.

‘Carl was very funny, charismatic, intelligent and incredibly artistic,’ recalls Julie. 

‘I remember when I came home from school with Tudor history homework, he’d say, “Right, let’s draw Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn”, and his work was brilliant — so detailed.

‘He was quite effeminate, with a high-pitched voice, and everyone at school knew he was gay from quite a young age, calling him queer, but he wasn’t ashamed and knew how to stick up for himself.’

Carl came out to his mother when he was 15, shortly after his parents separated. 

His mum accepted it, but his father, who held old-fashioned views on homosexuality, told him: ‘From now on, I wash my hands of you.’ 

He only saw Carl once after that, at Julie’s 1992 wedding.

‘That rejection had a devastating effect on Carl. I think he spent his life looking for acceptance through the love of older men,’ says Julie. 

‘My father, as he got older, told me, “Don’t ever think I don’t love your brother”. He was a man’s man, from a certain generation, and he felt ashamed to have a gay son.’

Carl often escaped to the ‘bright lights’ of London and, a talented singer and dancer, loved performing as a drag artist, emulating his idol Marilyn Monroe and singing Diamonds Are A Girl’s Best Friend in his home-made costumes.

It was a rootless existence, and it was while living at a hostel in London that Carl met Nilsen at the Black Cap pub in Camden in April 1982. 

They got chatting and Carl, then aged 21, agreed to go back to Nilsen’s attic flat in Muswell Hill, where he passed out on the bed drunk.

‘Carl was very open about what happened, and when I was older I’d ask him questions. He used to tell me that Nilsen was nice to him. Back then, gay men were not easily accepted, but here was someone who did, who asked him about his family and life,’ says Julie.

‘At Nilsen’s flat, they were drinking together and Carl was convinced Nilsen drugged him because all he could remember was passing out and then waking up to feel the zip around his neck, then coming round in a bath being drowned.’

Carl, pictured aged 37, with sister Julie. ¿He was so confused about why he was still alive, and was haunted for the rest of his life by survivors¿ guilt,' said Julie. 'He didn¿t start drinking until about two years after the court case, but once the alcohol got him that was it. It was all downhill from there.¿

Carl, pictured aged 37, with sister Julie. ¿He was so confused about why he was still alive, and was haunted for the rest of his life by survivors¿ guilt,' said Julie. 'He didn¿t start drinking until about two years after the court case, but once the alcohol got him that was it. It was all downhill from there.¿

Carl, pictured aged 37, with sister Julie. ‘He was so confused about why he was still alive, and was haunted for the rest of his life by survivors’ guilt,’ said Julie. ‘He didn’t start drinking until about two years after the court case, but once the alcohol got him that was it. It was all downhill from there.’

Carl, unaware Nilsen had later revived him, recalled being confused when he looked in the mirror to see his face bloated, his tongue swollen, burst blood vessels in his eyes and bleeding cuts to his neck.

Julie continues: ‘Nilsen walked him to the Tube station and Carl went straight to hospital. It was the doctors who told him to go to the police, saying: “We think someone has tried to kill you.”

‘But when he went to the station, they didn’t even take a proper statement. Carl didn’t know Nilsen’s surname and couldn’t remember his address, and officers just put it down to a lovers’ tiff. Carl started to think “Maybe it didn’t happen”.

‘Carl was suffering terrible flashbacks and moved back in with Mum because he was too frightened to go out. 

‘Mum used to say ‘It’s just a bad dream’ because she couldn’t believe that anyone might try to kill him; in her world things like that just didn’t happen.’

Julie says Carl started to go downhill the day police officers arrived at their mother’s home following Nilsen’s arrest in February 1983. 

A plumber raised the alarm after finding human remains in a blocked drain outside his rented property in Cranley Gardens.

He confessed to killing ‘15 or 16’ men after officers found bin liners in his wardrobe containing body parts, carrier bags filled with internal organs, and a wooden box containing limbs and torsos. 

A pot on the stove contained the boiled head of a victim.

At his previous rented ground-floor flat in Melrose Avenue, five miles away in Cricklewood, officers found more than 1,000 human teeth and bone fragments in the garden where Nilsen burned his victims.

He’d store their rotting corpses under the floorboards, after washing them and propping them up on the bed or in chairs. Sometimes he watched TV with them.

‘Carl was scared stiff of giving evidence and seeing Nilsen again,’ says Julie. ‘He was so confused about why he was still alive, and was haunted for the rest of his life by survivors’ guilt. 

‘He didn’t start drinking until about two years after the court case, but once the alcohol got him that was it. It was all downhill from there.’

Julie believes her brother was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. 

‘He applied to the Criminal Injuries board for compensation, but was rejected after being told if he had made a proper police complaint after his attack, two more victims might not have been killed. Carl felt they were blaming him for their murders and felt even more guilty.

‘He was living with us at Mum’s but he’d hit the bottle then just disappear. We’d get phone calls at 2am or 3am with him crying, saying he’d taken an overdose or cut his wrists. 

‘Mum would wake me up, because I was only 12 or 13 and couldn’t be left alone, and we’d go to try to find him in the car.

‘We’d find him under a hedge somewhere, in a terrible state. He was in and out of relationships, and often he’d get beaten up. 

‘Even if he hadn’t been hurt, he’d be on the phone to Mum in the early hours and she’d spend hours and hours trying to calm him down.

‘He flitted from one place to another. He went to Liverpool, Blackpool, London, Lancashire, Cheshire, drinking as much as he could to numb the pain. 

‘My mum and my step-dad once drove all the way to Liverpool to pick him up, and we all went to Marlborough in Wiltshire, after he fell into a diabetic coma and we thought he’d die.’

Julie says the family never stopped loving Carl and trying to help him, but sometimes he drove them away. 

When drunk, he could say cruel, hurtful things, then when he was sober he’d ring them up as if nothing had happened.

Actor Laurie Kynaston as Carl Stotter in acclaimed ITV drama Des, which aired the final episode this week

Actor Laurie Kynaston as Carl Stotter in acclaimed ITV drama Des, which aired the final episode this week

Actor Laurie Kynaston as Carl Stotter in acclaimed ITV drama Des, which aired the final episode this week

Following her wedding in 1992, where Carl was the usher, Julie saw her brother regularly. 

However, after her children were born she made the painful decision to not allow him near them.

‘The children never met Uncle Carl because he was an alcoholic and I had to shield them,’ she says. 

‘They knew all about him and spoke to him on the phone, and he had photo albums filled with pictures of his nephews and niece.

‘It sounds really harsh, but I couldn’t risk him being around them. When he was drunk, he didn’t care who was around when he took pills or harmed himself and I just couldn’t expose them to that. 

‘I didn’t want them to grow up, as I had done, with those 2am calls and having to go rescue him.’

Julie was relieved when Carl moved to Brighton in the early 1990s where he met the one partner who loved him and treated him well. 

But the relationship led to further heartbreak when Carl was diagnosed as HIV positive in 1998.

‘This guy was really nice and actually did love Carl, who decided he didn’t want any barriers between them and contracted HIV from him. 

‘This upset my mum because she was worried Carl had signed his own death warrant,’ says Julie.

‘Carl used to say, “The diabetes will get to me before the HIV”, but he seemed to have some kind of death wish. 

‘There were times when he tried to stay sober, but he never sought any proper help for his alcoholism, and when his partner died he hit the bottle again.’

She last saw Carl about a year before his death. He was still drinking heavily and relations were strained after he had failed to attend the 2010 funeral of their mother, who died from cancer aged 65. 

Their father died the November before Carl’s body was found.

Julie organised his funeral in February 2013. Diamonds Are A Girl’s Best Friend was played, and a photo of Carl dressed as Marilyn Monroe was placed on his coffin.

‘In the end, his life was horrible. He lived in his own hell and prison. We felt that at last he was at peace,’ she says. 

‘But I wanted Carl to be remembered as he was when he was happy, throwing his head back like Marilyn, with his infectious laugh.’

Today, Julie believes Nilsen murdered her brother as surely as he did his other victims, but it is her son Jack she still grieves for most — a tragedy she also lays at Nilsen’s door.

Jack, a sensitive child who’d suffered a spinal nerve injury during a difficult labour, was very close to Julie’s mother — his Nanny — and grew up seeing the heartbreak Carl had caused her over the years.

But Julie only realised the impact of her brother’s trauma and history on her son after he died.

‘Jack was very depressed over the break-up, it was his first true love, and I said to him, “Son, you’ll get over it, these things happen to make us stronger. Why don’t you come over tonight for a chat?’

‘My younger son tried to call him, but when he couldn’t get hold of him, took the spare key to Jack’s cottage. I will never forget that phone call saying, “Mum, he’s dead. What shall I do?”

‘My heart broke when I read his letter to me saying, “I don’t want to end up like Uncle Carl and drag you down like Nanny was dragged down by Carl.” Until then, I’d had no idea he felt that way.

‘I see Jack as another of Nilsen’s victims. It’s the ripple effect. The day Nilsen attacked Carl our whole family was destroyed.’

Julie shed not one tear when Nilsen died in 2018, aged 72, collapsing in his cell from a ruptured aneurysm. 

‘When I read that he died in excruciating pain, I thought “Good”,’ she says, adding, ‘It’s strange because Carl never once said he hated Nilsen, but what he did hate was the fact that Nilsen ended up having a much better life in prison than Carl ever did.’

Powered by: Daily Mail

Continue Reading

Latest Stories

Dublin locked down with further restrictions closing pubs and restaurants for indoor dining

Published

on

By

dublin locked down with further restrictions closing pubs and restaurants for indoor dining

The Irish Government has announced plans to tighten its coronavirus restrictions in Dublin.

Only pubs that serve food and restaurants with outdoor facilities may be permitted to open, while sporting events will also be prohibited.

Irish premier Micheal Martin announced that Dublin would move to risk level three of the Government’s blueprint plan to deal with Covid-19.

Lockdown: The Irish Government has announced plans to tighten its coronavirus restrictions in Dublin from midnight

Lockdown: The Irish Government has announced plans to tighten its coronavirus restrictions in Dublin from midnight

Lockdown: The Irish Government has announced plans to tighten its coronavirus restrictions in Dublin from midnight

He warned that without further ‘urgent and decisive action’ there was a very real threat that Dublin could return to the worst days of the crisis.

‘But this is not inevitable. I understand how frustrated people are, how much we all want to put this pandemic behind us. But we have to remember, it is still deadly and we have to take action,’ he added.

Under the new restrictions, which come into effect from midnight on Friday into Saturday, six visitors to private homes, including gardens, will be permitted from one other household only.

Last orders: Only pubs that serve food and restaurants with outdoor facilities may be permitted to remain open

Last orders: Only pubs that serve food and restaurants with outdoor facilities may be permitted to remain open

Last orders: Only pubs that serve food and restaurants with outdoor facilities may be permitted to remain open

All organised indoor gatherings have been banned and outdoor gatherings should have a maximum of 15 people.

Restaurants and cafes, including pubs serving food, will close to indoor dining but can remain open for takeaway and delivery.

They can also remain open for outdoor dining for a maximum of 15 people.

Visits to care home facilities have also been suspended, with the exception of critical and compassionate circumstances.

People living in the capital are advised to stay within the county, unless they need to travel for work, education and other essential purposes.

People outside of Dublin are being advised not to travel into the county except for work, education and other essential purposes.

Essential travel only: People living in the capital are advised to stay within the county, unless they need to travel for work, education and other essential purposes

Essential travel only: People living in the capital are advised to stay within the county, unless they need to travel for work, education and other essential purposes

Essential travel only: People living in the capital are advised to stay within the county, unless they need to travel for work, education and other essential purposes

The Government has also banned social or family gatherings, although weddings and funerals can take place but with restrictions.

The number of people at weddings and funerals will be limited to 25 from Monday, but weddings taking place this weekend can have 50 guests.

The restrictions come after health experts issued strong warnings in recent weeks about the spike in Covid-19 cases across Dublin.

Health experts had issued strong warnings in recent weeks about the spike in Covid-19 cases across Dublin

Health experts had issued strong warnings in recent weeks about the spike in Covid-19 cases across Dublin

Health experts had issued strong warnings in recent weeks about the spike in Covid-19 cases across Dublin

The Taoiseach also addressed criticisms that indoor dining was prohibited in Dublin, despite few cases being linked to restaurants.

‘The fact is that while we are seeing a lot of cases spreading in people’s homes, the initial infection is taking place outside the home and in the community,’ he added.

‘We need to keep the disease out of people’s homes in the first place.

‘Our decision to act now on indoor dining is not any reflection on business owners who have done everything that was asked of them.

‘We are doing this because we want to minimise the number of places where people can congregate and where the disease can spread for the next three weeks.’

The Government is enforcing the new measures to minimise the number of places where people can congregate and where the disease can spread for the next three weeks

The Government is enforcing the new measures to minimise the number of places where people can congregate and where the disease can spread for the next three weeks

The Government is enforcing the new measures to minimise the number of places where people can congregate and where the disease can spread for the next three weeks

Earlier this week, the Government announced its medium-term plan which is structured around five different levels of restrictions, numbered from one to five.

Every county in Ireland was given a status two risk level but several additional restrictions have been applied to Dublin.

Acting chief medical officer Dr Ronan Glynn had warned this week that the coronavirus situation had ‘deteriorated nationally’.

He said 50% of Thursday’s cases were in Dublin.

‘We are now seeing a higher proportion of cases in older age groups,’ he added.

‘Act now to save lives. Limit your contacts as much as possible. Assume you and those you meet are infectious, keep your distance and do your part to keep others safe.’

Deputy Irish premier Leo Varadkar announced a 30 million euro business bail-out for coronavirus-hit stores and restaurants frozen during the pandemic

Deputy Irish premier Leo Varadkar announced a 30 million euro business bail-out for coronavirus-hit stores and restaurants frozen during the pandemic

Deputy Irish premier Leo Varadkar announced a 30 million euro business bail-out for coronavirus-hit stores and restaurants frozen during the pandemic

What are the Government’s risk level three restrictions?

You can only allow visitors to your home from one other household or your own household only

No social gatherings should take place in other settings

Up to 25 guests can attend a wedding ceremony

No indoor gatherings should take place

Up to 15 people can gather at outdoor events

No sporting matches to take place

Sports training permitted outdoors in pods of up to 15, excluding professional sports

Gyms, leisure centres and swimming pools can open for individual training only

Religious services to move online

Additional restrictions for indoor dining at bars, restaurants and cafes

 

<!—->Advertisement

Deputy Irish premier Leo Varadkar raised concerns that the number of Covid-19 cases in Dublin was getting serious again.

‘We’ve seen a marked increase in the number of Covid cases confirmed in Ireland, particularly, though not exclusively, in the Dublin area, where the number of new cases has trebled in the space of two weeks,’ he said.

He also announced a 30 million euro business bail-out for coronavirus-hit stores and restaurants frozen during the pandemic.  

‘Today we’re releasing 30 million euros in additional grant aid to businesses across Dublin, in the form of a 30% increase in the restart grant.

‘Also five million euros has been allocated for tourism, culture and sport and that will be administered by Catherine Martin and her department, with more details to come in the coming days.

‘Also I’ve instructed all the agencies under my departments to prioritise applications that are coming into the Dublin area for other supports such as online training vouchers, business continuity grants and others.’

The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment also announced a number of funding initiatives to help Dublin businesses.

He said: ‘Some people have sadly been laid off for a second time in one year. For some businesses who were just getting up and running again, having to close again and starting to wonder if their businesses can ever survive.

‘For people who might be laid off today or tomorrow, I want to assure you that you are eligible for the Pandemic Unemployment Payment and in some cases your employer may decide to keep you on for those three weeks using the wage subsidy (scheme).

‘For businesses, I know this is going to be really tough. It’s not what you expected this September and we are going to stand behind you.’

Powered by: Daily Mail

Continue Reading

Latest Stories

ITV drama Des hit with Ofcom complaints from viewers disturbed by details of Dennis Nilsen’s murders

Published

on

By

itv drama des hit with ofcom complaints from viewers disturbed by details of dennis nilsens murders

ITV drama Des depicts the true story of British serial killer Dennis Nilsen and his murderous atrocities committed against men and boys between 1978 and 1983.

The broadcast regulators, Ofcom, have reportedly received seven complaints from viewers who were  left horrified by the disturbing details of his crimes in the three-part series, reports the Sun.

The TV drama documents Dennis – played by David Tenant – during his arrest and subsequent trial for the brutal murders of 15 young men, and launched to critical acclaim on Monday.

New show: ITV drama Des depicts the true story of British serial killer Dennis Nilsen and his murderous atrocities committed against men and boys between 1978 and 1983

New show: ITV drama Des depicts the true story of British serial killer Dennis Nilsen and his murderous atrocities committed against men and boys between 1978 and 1983

New show: ITV drama Des depicts the true story of British serial killer Dennis Nilsen and his murderous atrocities committed against men and boys between 1978 and 1983

Des has given ITV it’s biggest drama launch of the year after an average of 5.4 million viewers tuned in to watch. 

The first episode peaked at 5.9 million, however some fans were deterred by the chilling revelations of his crimes which included necrophilia and dismemberment, and they felt it warranted a complaint to Ofcom.

Other viewers took to Twitter to share their reaction as they became engrossed in the dark yet gripping storytelling of Dennis which unfolded on the small screen. 

Horrified: The broadcast regulators, Ofcom, have reportedly received seven complaints from viewers left horrified by the disturbing nature of the three part series

Horrified: The broadcast regulators, Ofcom, have reportedly received seven complaints from viewers left horrified by the disturbing nature of the three part series

Horrified: The broadcast regulators, Ofcom, have reportedly received seven complaints from viewers left horrified by the disturbing nature of the three part series

One viewer penned: ‘Oh it’s time to scare myself silly again Face screaming in fearwatching @itv #Des I’m hoping @TwiningsUK Sleeping symbol is going to help this evening #scared #itv #itvdes #tea #twinings #sleep.’

DCI Jay is in charge of the investigation into Dennis and is played by Ashes to Ashes actor, Daniel Mays. A viewer tweeted to the 42-year old actor and said: ‘@DanielMays9 Just watched Des, scared to go to sleep now!’

Another viewer added: ‘I can attest that reading Dennis Nilsen’s Wikipedia page before turning in doesn’t make for a great night’s sleep. #Des.’

MailOnline have reached out to Ofcom for further comment.     

Too much: An average 5.4 million viewers tuned in to watch Des however some fans were deterred by the chilling details of his crimes which included necrophilia and dismemberment

Too much: An average 5.4 million viewers tuned in to watch Des however some fans were deterred by the chilling details of his crimes which included necrophilia and dismemberment

Too much: An average 5.4 million viewers tuned in to watch Des however some fans were deterred by the chilling details of his crimes which included necrophilia and dismemberment

Dennis, who died at the age of 74 in 2018 at HMP Full Sutton, 34 years into his life sentence, is believed to have killed as many as 15 gay men, most of them homeless, at his homes in north London suburbs Cricklewood and Muswell Hill.

During his killing spree, Dennis would befriend his subjects in pubs and bars in London before luring them into his flat, where he would murder them and sit with their corpses before dismembering them.

His crimes were discovered when a drain outside his home on Cranley Gardens, Muswell Hill, became blocked by human remains that he had tried to flush away.  

Dennis was jailed for life with a recommendation he serve a minimum of 25 years in 1983, on six counts of murder and two of attempted murder. The sentence was later upgraded to a whole-life tariff.   

Shocking: Dennis (pictured) who died at the age of 74 in 2018 at HMP Full Sutton, 34 years into his life sentence, is believed to have killed as many as 15 gay men at his homes in north London

Shocking: Dennis (pictured) who died at the age of 74 in 2018 at HMP Full Sutton, 34 years into his life sentence, is believed to have killed as many as 15 gay men at his homes in north London

Shocking: Dennis (pictured) who died at the age of 74 in 2018 at HMP Full Sutton, 34 years into his life sentence, is believed to have killed as many as 15 gay men at his homes in north London

Powered by: Daily Mail

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 DiazHub.