Chris Packham tells libel trial of ‘vile material about me and my family’ posted online
Springwatch presenter, 61, tells of fears for his security
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Chris Packham has told a libel trial that “unsubstantiated claims” about him have encouraged opponents to post “vile material about me and my family” online.
The BBC presenter is suing three men for libel over claims he defrauded people into donating to a charity to rescue tigers while knowing the animals were well looked after.
Mr Packham is also accused of dishonestly raising money for the charity at the start of the pandemic while knowing it was due to receive a £500,000 benefit from its insurance.
The strongly denied allegations, repeated in several tweets and videos, relate to Mr Packham’s involvement with the Wildheart Trust, which runs a sanctuary on the Isle of Wight.
I do go to walk my dogs in the woods and wonder: is today the day that a psychopath fuelled by all this hate turns up and kills me?
Dominic Wightman, editor of the online Country Squire Magazine, is defending the libel claim along with writer Nigel Bean and a third man, Paul Read.
On the second day of the trial at the High Court in London on Wednesday, the BBC Springwatch presenter said he was a “victim of a campaign of vile and relentless intimidation”.
In a 50-page witness statement, Mr Packham said his “deeply held views” have attracted criticism from people who shoot and fox hunt – detailing some of the threats he receives.
He said his post has been stolen regularly, adding “random dead animals and human faeces are regularly posted to me”.
“I have become accustomed to the plethora of dead animals people leave at my home,” Mr Packham continued.
He also said that in October 2021, “masked attackers” set fire to a car and burned down the gate to his home, with local police said to believe the arson was carried out by paid professionals.
Mr Packham said he believed the “defendants’ unsubstantiated claims have misled, agitated and fuelled a vocal and violent conspiratorial fringe who increasingly post threatening and vile material about me and my family”.
The 61-year-old later said he fears for his and his family’s security.
He continued: “I do go to walk my dogs in the woods and wonder: is today the day that a psychopath fuelled by all this hate turns up and kills me?
They are ridiculous, utterly unfounded, and plainly designed to be as upsetting, threatening and reputationally damaging as possible
“I genuinely no longer expect to live a long life free from violence and intimidation. Because it may only take the one wrong person to read Country Squire Magazine for things to go horribly wrong.”
Mr Packham also said the men had “repeatedly picked on and mocked my Asperger’s syndrome” as well as likening him to Jimmy Savile.
The presenter called these allegations “totally unconscionable”, adding: “They are ridiculous, utterly unfounded, and plainly designed to be as upsetting, threatening and reputationally damaging as possible.”
He denied fraudulently raising money for the charity, adding he “we weren’t hopeful that we would be insured against Covid-19 closures”.
“The insurance payments … ultimately saved the sanctuary in what was a time of dire need. But to be very clear, if we had not launched the fundraising appeal as rapidly as we did then these payments may have arrived too late to make a difference.”
Nicholas O’Brien, for Mr Wightman and Mr Bean, said the allegations in the articles in the claim were true and could also be defended.
In written submissions, the barrister said: “It is clear that the tigers had not been rescued from a circus, were not then in need of rescue, and were not rescued by Mr Packham.”
However, Mr Packham said it was correct to use the word “rescue” when talking about the tigers moved to the sanctuary.
He said: “They had been mutilated in that circus, teeth sawn off, claws torn out, leaving them with long-term health issues. These animals were the victims of systematic long-term abuse and deprivation and thus any movement toward a clearly positive change constitutes a rescue.”
The trial before Mr Justice Saini is due to conclude on 12 May, with a decision expected later.