Bailey legal team says allegations never proved

Seven newspapers sued by English journalist Ian Bailey effectively accused him of committing "murder most foul" and then declined to put any of the journalists or editors into the witness box to defend them, the plaintiff's lawyer claimed today.

"These articles said to the man who read them that this man murdered Sophie Toscan du Plantier. It is an allegation of murder most foul. That is what the articles are saying," James Duggan, barrister for the plaintiff said at Cork Circuit Court.

"I came here and opened the case two weeks ago about seven defamatory articles. I did not have to go into evidence. Prima facie they are defamatory of my client. It is up to the defence to say they can find refuge in one or other area of law to allow them to do so with impunity.

"I must say I was flabbergasted that the defendants finished their evidence without calling one journalist relevant to the articles, no writer, no editor," he said.

Commenting on the massive coverage the case has attracted, Mr Duggan said the newspapers "are making their money back."

On the issue of trial coverage, Judge Patrick J. Moran remarked, "Well you are suing seven newspapers".

Mr Duggan claimed that some of the most damaging allegations, three in particular, were never proved.

* It was alleged that Mr Bailey was seen washing his Wellington boots in a stream a mile from Sophie Toscan du Plantier's home on the night of her murder.

* It was alleged that he was seen burning clothes some time after the murder.

* He had scars on the face it was claimed.

"None of these were in any way proved to be true," Mr Duggan said. "The defendant who pleads justification must prove that statements of facts are true," he added.

Referring to the defence argument that Mr Bailey had given consent for the writing of the articles about him he argued that there was a legal onus to have this consent in writing, and that if it was oral it should be backed up by a witness.