David Furnish Condemns Daily Mail's Alleged Information Theft as 'Abomination' in High Court Trial
Filmmaker David Furnish has described the alleged theft of information and tapping of his and Sir Elton John's landline as an "abomination" during their ongoing High Court trial against the publisher of the Daily Mail. The couple, along with other high-profile figures including the Duke of Sussex and actress Liz Hurley, are pursuing legal action against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), claiming that ten articles published between 2002 and 2015 were based on unlawfully obtained data, with a particular focus on sensitive medical details.
Allegations of Homophobia and Unlawful Practices
In his written evidence, Furnish stated that he and Sir Elton have endured a "long and difficult history with The Mail," accusing the publication of persistent homophobia. He elaborated that while the newspaper has somewhat evolved over time, it has consistently published judgmental and narrow-minded stories aimed at undermining their lives. Furnish expressed outrage at the alleged methods used, including stolen information, private investigators, landline tapping, and recorded telephone calls, which he labelled an abomination.
On the fourteenth day of the trial, Furnish gave evidence remotely via videolink from London. During cross-examination, ANL's barristers, Antony White KC and Catrin Evans KC, argued that the social circles of the claimants were "leaky," with friends and associates regularly providing confidential information to the press. They specifically noted that Sir Elton's spokesman at the time frequently shared details about their lives, including health information, with media outlets like Associated journalists.
Disputes Over Information Sources and Privacy
When questioned about his interactions with journalists, Furnish firmly denied any willingness to engage, stating, "I really try to avoid them at all costs." He also contested the suggestion that individuals in his social circle felt it was acceptable to share private information, asserting that non-friends would not have access to such details. The trial has highlighted significant tensions over the sourcing of articles, with ANL vehemently denying any wrongdoing and labelling the allegations as "unsupported by any evidence and utterly baseless."
One particularly contentious issue involves an article about the couple's son, Zachary, born via surrogate. Furnish claimed that the Daily Mail used the story to advance a homophobic agenda, pairing it with unflattering photos and mocking captions. He described this as "deeply offensive" and consistent with the publication's attitude toward them. In response, ANL's lawyers argued that the article was legitimately sourced from public reports, registrar's office information, and a statement from the surrogacy agency, though Furnish countered that no permission was given for such disclosures.
Medical Privacy and Trial Proceedings
Another article under scrutiny concerns Sir Elton's medical treatment in 2009, when he cancelled tour dates. Furnish expressed concern over the specific details about the singer's X-rays and scans published in the article, arguing that while public statements were necessary to reassure fans, they should not reveal exhaustive medical information. ANL's representatives maintained that the reporting was based on public statements and spokesperson comments, but Furnish insisted that the level of detail was inappropriate and concerning.
The trial, presided over by Mr Justice Nicklin, is set to conclude in March, with a written judgment to follow at a later date. This case underscores broader issues of privacy, media ethics, and the protection of personal information in the digital age, as prominent figures challenge alleged unlawful news-gathering practices by a major newspaper publisher.
