The key allegations against Noel Clarke – and the judge’s response

Published

10 hours ago

August 23, 2025

admin

Multiple witnesses gave evidence about their experiences of working with Noel Clarke during his libel trial – including women who had “nothing to gain and everything to lose”, say the Guardian journalists who carried out the investigation.

Before the newspaper published its report on allegations of inappropriate behaviour and sexual misconduct in 2021, Clarke was a huge success story in the UK film and TV industry – the acclaimed filmmaker behind Kidulthood, star of hit shows including Doctor Who and Bulletproof, and recipient of a BAFTA rising star award and another for his contribution to British cinema.

Clarke denied any allegations of inappropriate behaviour or sexual misconduct, and in 2022 he sued the publishers of the newspaper for libel.

Following a trial earlier this year, a High Court judge, Mrs Justice Steyn, has now dismissed his claim, finding the meaning of the newspaper’s report and other subsequent articles it published was “substantially true”.

The trial heard evidence from multiple witnesses, including some women whose real names were not used. Their accusations against the actor and filmmaker included claims of inappropriate comments, sharing nude photographs without consent, and groping.

Here are some of the key allegations – and the judge’s response.

‘Maya’

An actress known as “Maya” worked on one production with Clarke and also auditioned for another, the judge said.

She alleged she had been subject to comments and looks from Clarke, and felt pressured to be naked during a scene for a TV programme.

Recording of a phone call between Clarke and the actress was heard in court, including conversation about this scene.

“It was an uncomfortable experience,” Maya said in the call. “We were rehearsing the romantic scene… I didn’t say anything to you. I felt pressured to be naked from you in that scene.”

Clarke said in court that he believed she was “acting” on the call ahead of making allegations against him.

In her ruling, Mrs Justice Steyn found Maya had been “sexually harassed, pressured and touched” by Clarke without her consent.

“It is apparent that he was insensitive to the discomfort he provoked,” the judge said. “But as is clear from his comments in the recorded phone call, and from the evidence generally, Mr Clarke would habitually, and lasciviously, look young, attractive women up and down.”

Floor runner

One woman who worked as a floor runner said her experience of working with Clarke was “extremely unpleasant” and that he was “rude and continuously belittling” towards her from the outset, according to court documents.

She said Clarke did not behave the same way towards another male runner and that she “dreaded being alone” with him as she would be “routinely undermined”. She said she became “extremely anxious” and had her first panic attack during filming when “Noel was ignoring my instructions and I couldn’t carry out my job”, which she described as humiliating.

The judge found she gave “clear, honest and reliable evidence”, and added: “She was a young woman, in a far subordinate role, who he singled out for this belittling and bullying treatment. It is probable that he acted in this way for no other reasons than that he had the power to do so, and he found it amusing.”

‘Penelope’

One actress, known as “Penelope”, said she worked on a sex scene with Clarke and that they discussed “perhaps wearing patches or covers”, but Noel was “insistent that he didn’t think this would work and said he wanted to ‘keep it natural’.”

In her witness statement, Penelope said she begged him to stop asking her to look at him while he was exposed and to allow others back into the room.

She said she felt “disgusted, shocked and frightened”, and concerned that he had “created an impression to the crew that I was complicit in whatever was happening behind that closed door”.

In her ruling, the judge said she found Penelope to be an honest witness and found it was not necessary for her to be naked from the waist down for the scene.

She added: “I have not found that the requirement for ‘Penelope’ to be naked below the waist for the filming of the sex scene was introduced for Mr Clarke’s sexual gratification, but he did then take advantage of it for that purpose.”

‘Imogen’

Clarke invited an actress known as “Imogen” to dinner in 2014, when she was 20, the trial heard.

Imogen alleged he propositioned her for sex and offered to take photos, and also talked about going to brothels and tried to kiss her on the street after the meal.

He looked “furious” when she avoided his kiss, she claimed.

Her account was “honest”, and save for a few minor points, “it was also reliable and accurate”, the judge found.

‘Mila’

Another actress known as “Mila” described taking part in a scene that required nudity from the waist down.

During the shoot, he also told her to bend over, asked her to sit on his lap, and made inappropriate sexual comments, she said.

Again, the judge found she had “no reason to lie”.

While Clarke denied the allegations, the judge concluded The Guardian had, save for a couple of points, proved its case in respect of Mila.

Gina Powell

Gina Powell was part of Clarke’s production company, Unstoppable, between 2014 and 2017.

She alleges he groped her in a lift, exposed himself to her in a car, and brushed off concerns about his sexual behaviour towards other women. He also kept naked pictures of others, she claimed.

Ms Powell told the court she had been through years of “guilt” watching how Clarke behaved with other women, which led to her speaking out.

The judge found that on one occasion where Clarke pinched Ms Powell’s bottom when they were being photographed, “his intent was not sexual”, and it was “intended as a friendly and jocular attempt to provoke a startled expression”.

However, she also ruled that Ms Powell was “an honest, reliable” witness and accepted the filmmaker had shown her nude photographs, as well as her evidence on what happened in the car and lift.

‘Ivy’

One woman, known only as “Ivy”, said in a witness statement that she had had a brief relationship with Clarke, while he was married, and alleged she later discovered he had shared nude photographs of her without her consent.

Ivy said she was “horrified” to discover later that the private images had been shown to others.

“Trusting him, I consensually sent him a small number of nude photos of myself,” she said. “I expressly told him that he should not show them to anyone… I believed that he would respect that.”

The court heard evidence from others who corroborated her account.

The judge, in her ruling, found The Guardian had established Clarke “revealed naked photographs” of Ivy without her consent and shared them with others.

Jing Lusi

Actress Jing Lusi, known for films including Crazy Rich Asians and series including Gangs Of London and Red Eye, worked with Clarke on the film SAS: Red Notice, which was filmed in Budapest in 2018.

She said that during a dinner, he suggested to her that they could do a read-through of the script in his “bed” or “bedroom”.

He also told her he had “fantasised” about her and described what he wanted to do to her, in a separate incident, she alleged. She said this left her feeling “disgusted”.

Clarke denied her allegations.

In her ruling, Mrs Justice Steyn said that while she accepted Ms Lusi’s account, she did find that in circumstances where Clarke’s behaviour towards her was not an abuse of power, “the events described did not assist the Guardian in establishing the truth defence”.

UK

Police separate anti-immigration and anti-racism protesters across the country

Published

1 hour ago

August 23, 2025

admin

Police separate anti-immigration and anti-racism protesters across the country

Protesters have gathered across the country as groups demonstrated against asylum seeker housing and were met by anti-racism campaigners.

Demonstrations under the Abolish Asylum System slogan were held in England, Scotland and Wales, including in Bristol, Exeter, Tamworth, Cannock, Aberdeen, Mold, Perth, Nuneaton, Liverpool, Wakefield, Newcastle, Horley and Canary Wharf.

Counter-protests were also organised by campaign group Stand Up to Racism.

In Bristol, mounted police separated the two groups in the Castle Park, with officers scuffling with protesters.

Police kept around 200 anti-immigration protesters draped in English flags away from roughly 50 Stand Up to Racism protesters in Horley, Surrey.

One man, wearing a West Ham United football shirt, was held by police as he yelled: “You’re not welcome here, you’re not welcome here, you’re not welcome here” at anti-racism protesters.

Anti-immigration protesters also chanted: “Tommy, Tommy, Tommy, Tommy Robinson” in support of the far-right activist, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon.

The anti-racism protesters chanted “say it loud, say it clear, refugees are welcome here” and held signs calling for solidarity and to “stop deportations”.

The Stand Up to Racism protesters were shepherded into a smaller area as they continued to chant: “No hate, no fear, refugees are welcome here”, which was met with “No they’re f****** not” from the other side of the street.

In Perth, protesters gathered outside the Radisson Hotel.

The anti-migration protesters held up signs with slogans such as “Perth is full – empty the hotels” and “get them out”.

Stand Up to Racism Scotland said it had achieved “victory” in Perth, with more than 200 gathering to oppose the Abolish Asylum System demonstration.

In Liverpool, a dispersal order was issued to try and contain the protests.

Saturday’s events come amid continued tension around the use of the hotels for asylum seekers.

Regular protests had been held outside the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, which started after an asylum seeker housed there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl on 10 July.

Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, 38, was charged with trying to kiss a teenage girl and denies the allegations. He is due to stand trial later this month.

In the wake of those protests, Epping Forest District Council sought and won an interim High Court injunction to stop migrants from being accommodated there – a decision which the government is seeking permission to appeal.

UK

Reform UK’s new immigration plans would’ve been extreme just a few years ago

Published

2 hours ago

August 23, 2025

admin

Reform UK's new immigration plans would've been extreme just a few years ago

Mass deportations. Prison camps. Quitting the Refugee Convention and the UN Convention on Torture.

A shrug of the shoulders at the idea of the UK sending asylum seekers back to places like Afghanistan or Eritrea, where they could be tortured or executed.

“I’m really sorry, but we can’t be responsible for everything that happens in the whole of the world,” says Nigel Farage.

“Who is our priority?”

The Reform UK leader has been setting out his party’s new plans to address illegal migration in an interview with The Times newspaper – a set of policies, and a use of language, which would surely have been seen as extreme just a few years ago.

Only last autumn the Reform leader repeatedly shied away from the concept of “mass deportations”, describing the idea as “a political impossibility”.

But now he’s embraced Trump-style immigration rhetoric.

It’s not surprising that Reform want to capitalise on the outpouring of public anger over the use of hotels to house asylum seekers. The policy was started by the previous Conservative government, in response to housing shortages – and Labour has failed to make significant progress on its promise to stop it.

But all the major parties have shifted firmly to the right on this issue.

There’s been very little political criticism of the aggressiveness of Farage’s policy suggestions, and the premise that the UK should no longer offer sanctuary to anyone who arrives here illegally.

The Tory response has been to complain that he’s just copying the ideas they didn’t quite get round to implementing before calling the general election.

“Four months late, this big reveal is just recycling many ideas the Conservatives have already announced,” said Chris Philp MP, the shadow home secretary.

“Labour’s border crisis does urgently need to be fixed with tough and radical measures, but only the Conservatives have done – and will continue to do – the detailed work to deliver a credible plan that will actually work in practice.”

Certainly, the ambition to arrest and deport everyone who arrives in a small boat – regardless of whether or not they have legitimate grounds for asylum – has clear echoes of the Tories’ Rwanda policy.

Despite spending £700m on the controversial idea, only four volunteers were ever sent to Kigali before it was cancelled by Sir Keir Starmer, who branded it a gimmick.

Labour have suggested they’ve diverted Home Office resources that were freed up by that decision into processing asylum claims more quickly and increasing deportations.

They’re hoping tougher action against the criminal gangs and the new “one in one out” deal with France will help deter the number of people crossing the Channel in small boats in the first place, currently at record levels.

But rather than offering any defence of the principle of offering asylum to genuine refugees – Labour’s Angela Eagle MP, the border security minister, has also focused on the feasibility of Farage’s policies.

“Nigel Farage is simply plucking numbers out of the air, another pie in the sky policy from a party that will say anything for a headline,” she said.

“We are getting a grip of the broken asylum system. Making sure those with no right to be here are removed or deported.”

Even the Liberal Democrats have taken a similar approach.

“This plan sums up Nigel Farage perfectly, as like him it doesn’t offer any real solutions,” they said.

“Whilst Farage continues to stoke division, we Liberal Democrats are more interested in delivering for our local communities.”

It’s been left to the Refugee Council to defend the principle of asylum.

“After the horrors of the Second World War, Britain and its allies committed to protecting those fleeing persecution,” said CEO Enver Solomon.

“The Refugee Convention was our collective vow of ‘never again’ – a legal framework ensuring that people who come to our country seeking safety get a fair chance to apply for asylum.

“That commitment remains vital today. Whether escaping conflict in Sudan or repression under regimes like the Taliban, people still need protection.

“Most find refuge in neighbouring countries. But some will seek sanctuary in Europe, including Britain.

“We can meet this challenge by upholding a fair, managed system that determines who qualifies for protection and who does not.”

But with Reform leading in the polls, and protests outside hotels across the country – politicians of all stripes are under pressure to respond to public frustration over the issue.

A recent YouGov poll found half of voters now believe immigration over the last ten years has been mostly bad for the country – double the figure just three years ago.

While the government has made some progress in reducing the cost of asylum hotels – down from £8.3m a day in 2023/4 to £5.77m a day in 2024/5 – the overall numbers accommodated in this way have gone up by 8% since Labour took charge, thanks to the surge in new claims.

Sir Keir has previously said he won’t make a promise he can’t keep.

But current efforts to end the use of asylum hotels by 2029 are clearly not working.

That’s a credibility gap Farage is more than ready to exploit.

UK

Three people in a life-threatening condition after ‘arson attack’ at restaurant

Published

5 hours ago

August 23, 2025

admin

Three people in a life-threatening condition after 'arson attack' at restaurant

Three people are in a life-threatening condition after a suspected arson attack at a restaurant in Ilford, say police.

Five people – three women and two men – were injured in the fire, which broke out shortly after 9pm on Friday at Indian Aroma on Woodford Avenue, Gants Hill.

No arrests have been made.

Hospital porter Edward Thawe, 43, went to help with his son after hearing screams from his nearby home.

He described the scene as “horrible” and “more than scary and the sort of thing that you don’t want to look at twice”.

He said: “I heard screaming and people saying they had called the police.”

He said he saw a woman and a severely burned man who may have been customers.

He said the man’s “whole body was burnt”, including his shirt, but he was still wearing his trousers.

After being treated at the scene by paramedics from the London Ambulance Service, the victims were taken to hospital.

Nine others were able to get out beforehand, London Fire Brigade (LFB) said in a statement.

“The brigade’s control officers received seven calls about the fire and mobilised crews from Ilford, Hainault, Leytonstone and Woodford fire stations to the scene. The fire was extinguished by 10.32pm,” said an LFB spokesperson.

“We understand this incident will cause concern within the community. My team of specialist detectives are working at speed to piece the incident together,” said Detective Chief Inspector Mark Rogers, of the Met’s Central Specialist Crime North unit.

“Locals can expect to see a large police presence in the area. If you have any concerns, please speak to those officers on the ground.”

The London Ambulance Service told Sky News: “We sent resources to the scene, including ambulance crews, an advanced paramedic, an incident response officer and paramedics from our hazardous area response team.

“We treated five people for burns and smoke inhalation. We took two patients to a major trauma centre and three others to local hospitals.”

Health secretary Wes Streeting, who is the MP for Ilford North, posted on X to thank the emergency services for their response to the fire.

He also asked his constituents to “please avoid the area for now”.

Anyone with information is urged to contact the Met via 101, quoting 7559/22AUG. If you wish to remain anonymous, please speak with Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.