News

Mirror Damages Trial: Court hears evidence of Shobna Gulati and Robert Ashworth

10/03/2015

On Monday 9 March 2015, the sixth day of the Mirror Damages Trial, the Court heard evidence from former Coronation Street actress Shobna Gulati and former TV producer Robert Ashworth.Ms Gulati told Mr Justice Mann that following the publication of an article in the Sunday Mirror on 23 November 2003 entitled “Real life secret marriage of Corrie Street bride Shobna” she wrote to the PCC. She said “I believe that this was not in the public interest that the parentage of my child would be debated in a Sunday newspaper. So I wrote this letter”.Ms Gulati told the Court that, as a result of the article her 9 year old was bullied at school about the identity of his father.She gave evidence that she had left a jokey voicemail saying “Next thing for me is the jungle, probably” and that shortly afterwards an article had appeared in the Sunday Mirror suggesting that she had landed a place in I’m a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here”. The article, which also said she had been dumped by her lover and by Coronation Street, caused her son to run away from home.When being questioned about the MGN apology to victims of phone hacking Ms Gulati said that for her, the articles which were admitted to being based on phone hacking were “only the tip of the iceberg”.She said that “The thing that has affected me the most deeply and has caused me all sorts of pain and trauma, and still does this day, because some of those articles that have appeared are still referred to in press that I have done recently, besides all of that is the fact that I’m — and when I read this I’m still unsure — as to how much of my personal life was listened to by faceless, nameless folk who… who knew the ins and out of my life. It still leaves me feeling slightly empty inside.”The next witness was Robert Ashworth who gave evidence as to the effect of phone hacking on his life and his relationship with his then wife the actress Tracey Shaw.MGN Limited admitted that an article which referred to his contact with his divorce lawyer was the product of phone hacking. Mr Ashworth told the Court that this article “caused a huge amount of problems. The only person that knew that I was going to see a solicitor was the solicitor themself and my mother. I kept it this way because I was only exploring at this point the option of getting a divorce… When Tracy sees this — saw this in the newspaper, and we were still trying to mend things, that completely destroyed the trust between us.”Mr Ashworth said that his wife and her family thought that he was leaking the information to the press.He dismissed MGN’s apology, telling the judge “They think that an A4 piece of paper can say sorry for the damage that they created. Not only did I lose, through their use of their articles, my marriage, I lost my career… how many times were they listening to all my deepest darkest thoughts? All the times I was crying, the times Tracy was crying to me, what, and laughing in the office?”He said that “The phone hacking articles that were there caused an awful lot of distress. They broke the trust between myself and her. They broke the trust between her family and my family. These are the things which should not have been in the public domain. I didn’t have any choice or control over the information that was put out there.”In In addition to Mr Gulati and Mr Ashworth there are six other representative claimants, BBC Executive Alan Yentob, soap stars Shane Roche, and Lucy Benjamin, actress Sadie Frost, former footballer Paul Gascoigne and flight attendant Lauren Alcorn.The court will, today, hear evidence from Ms Alcorn, Mr Roche and Steve McFadden.The evidence is likely to conclude this week, with closing submissions the following week.This was first published on the Inforrm blog. You can read the original here.Republished by kind permission.

Download the full report:

Download report

Queries: campaign@hackinginquiry.org

related Posts

A year and two days: the story of one complaint to IPSO
Guest blog: Chris Goodall's complaint about fifteen errors in a Daily Mail article took IPSO a year and two days to decide. Here he publishes the full timeline — more than 80 emails, hundreds of hours of work, and one correction.
9/22/26
News
SLAPPs and the press: why the Anti-SLAPP Bill is the wrong answer
The private members Bill promoted by Baroness Stowell and Sir John Whittingdale would apply to any claim touching a matter of public interest, however meritorious and however properly brought. Hacked Off sets out why it would harm victims of press abuse, and why section 40 was the better answer.
9/21/26
News
Coverage of Professor Arday was not legitimate: the letter The Times refused to publish
Guest blog: Professor Paul Wragg replies to the letter published in The Times on 25 August defending the press coverage of Professor Jason Arday. The Times declined to publish his reply. We publish it here in full.
8/28/26
News
Defensive, evasive & hypocritical: The press reaction to the death of Jason Arday
The reaction of national newspapers to the death of Professor Jason Arday has exposed a brittle defensiveness at the heart of the press, and a determination to remain outside any meaningful accountability.
8/26/26
News