Bercow's McAlpine Tweet Was 'Nudge And Wink'

Sally Bercow was giving a "nudge and a wink" when she named Lord McAlpine after allegations about a senior Tory being a paedophile, the High Court has heard.

The Commons Speaker's wife is being sued by the Tory peer for damages after she named him on Twitter last year.

She posted "Why is Lord McAlpine trending? *Innocent face*" two days after a BBC Newsnight report about a leading politician and a scandal at a children's home in the 1970s and 1980s.

Lord McAlpine, who received six-figure payouts from the BBC and ITV after being wrongly identified, claims the post meant he was a paedophile who had abused boys in care.

Mrs Bercow, who apologised to the peer on Twitter and in a private letter, admits the comment was foolish but denies it was libellous.

At a hearing to decide the meaning of the tweet, the peer's lawyer Sir Edward Garnier QC said the claims had spread "like wildfire".

"There was a prominent and salacious story in the media, and what was missing was the name of the abuser at its centre," he said.

Sir Edward pointed out that Twitter users were not cut off from the world or the media, but were inquisitive, IT literate people.

He told Mr Justice Tugendhat that the tweet, on its own, suggested that Lord McAlpine had "done something wrong".

Naming someone and then adding "innocent face" hints at wrongdoing and was a "nudge and a wink to readers", the QC said.

"She was sarcastically pointing out that Lord McAlpine was trending and that he was trending because he was a paedophile," he said.

"It negates any suggestion that the tweet was a neutral query to which she was looking for an answer.

"Put it this way, what was the tweet about if it was not a pointing the finger of blame at Lord McAlpine?"

Mrs Bercow was in court for the hearing but Lord McAlpine did not attend. If the peer wins at trial, another hearing will decide the level of damages.

He abandoned defamation claims about Twitter users with fewer than 500 followers earlier this year, asking instead for a charitable donation, but kept up the case against Mrs Bercow.

Her counsel William McCormick QC has argued that her tweet was entirely neutral and simply posed a question about Lord McAlpine trending.

Mr McCormick suggested the words and punctuation of "innocent face" only indicated it should be read in a deadpan way and was similar to stage directions.

He argued that it was not his client's fault if her comment prompted readers to find other tweets that defamed the peer.

Mrs Bercow's team do not accept that the background events to the claim were notorious general knowledge when the tweet was sent.

The Newsnight show had a relatively small audience and it was not until David Cameron was challenged about the story on ITV that "blanket" coverage developed, her lawyer claims.

He said that even if the tweet was taken as referring to some form of controversy involving the peer, it was a form of reportage and did not take sides.

The judge has reserved his decision to a later unspecified date.