Man who gave interviews about his crimes asks court to delete Google results

Case continues in London

Giving interviews about your criminal conviction

Some years after his conviction, and in the mistaken belief that it had already become spent, NT2 gave an interview to a newspaper about Delta and his conviction.

“You could have chosen not to discuss your conviction publicly, if you chose, but instead you chose to give an interview to a national newspaper about it,” said White.

“That’s correct”, said NT2.

“One of the themes of this interview is exculpatory,” said the barrister, drawing the clear inference that far from wanting to be forgotten, NT2 – whom, Google has argued, now presents himself online as an investment expert for business owners – was courting the limelight again.

“I’m sorry?” asked the businessman.

White explained: “Exculpatory. You seek to justify your offending.”

“I wouldn’t characterise it like that,” parried NT2.

White turned to the article and started reading it out: “‘Attacks drove him [to the private investigation firm].’ The word ‘drove’ implies you were forced to take the action you did. Do you agree?”

NT2 paused. Seconds silently ticked by as the collection of solicitors, barristers and junior lawyers in the well of the court waited expectantly. “No, I don’t agree,” adding later on in proceedings, “I think the purpose of the article is to move forwards, not backwards.”

White remained unconvinced. “You must have appreciated as an experienced businessman that giving an interview to [a national newspaper] in which you discussed your conviction would result in substantial publicity about it?”

“I was largely following advice from [a public relations company],” replied NT2.

He was asked by both White and the judge, Mr Justice Warby, not to refer to a sheaf of notes he had taken with him onto the stand. “It’s not a memory test,” said White, not unkindly, “but I will ask you questions based on the documents in front of you,” referring to the momentous bundles of evidence compiled by both sides.

Under the strain of cross-examination by a top barrister, NT2 showed visible signs of stress, turning pink in the face and becoming fidgety. His oral evidence was characterised by constant requests for White to give the precise page number in the many bundles (ring-bound folders) of printed statements used by the barristers – something even Tomlinson and Mr Justice Warby echoed at times.

The case will continue on Wednesday 14 March. The Information Commissioner has made a submission to the court tearing into Google for, among other things, claiming it should be covered by the journalism exemption to data protection law. ®