TL;DR
Get movie nights delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Comedian and author David Walliams was identified by The Guardian on Nov. 10 after a UK court refused his bid to prevent publication of his name. He denies being a sexual predator and says he has not broken the law; the allegations reported by The Guardian and ITN have not been established in court.
Comedian and children’s book author David Walliams was named on Nov. 10 as the celebrity at the center of sexual misconduct allegations reported by The Guardian and ITN, after a UK judge refused his bid to prevent publication of his identity. Walliams denies being a sexual predator and says he has not broken the law; the allegations have not been tested in court.
The Guardian reported that multiple women accused Walliams of using his status to groom them for sex. Two women said they were 15 when they met him; both are now in their 30s. The allegations described by the outlet include contact that began at a fan event and continued through phone calls and email, and another account in which a woman said Walliams initiated sexual contact weeks after they met. These are allegations attributed to the women, not findings by a court.
The Guardian and ITN said their joint investigation involved 30 sources and covered alleged behavior over several decades. The organizations also reported speaking with young models and fans who said Walliams messaged them on social media when they were between 17 and 22, as well as people who said they experienced or witnessed workplace harassment. The report says HarperCollins ended its relationship with Walliams last year after an internal investigation concerning alleged inappropriate behavior toward female employees.
Walliams sought an injunction against ITN and Guardian News and Media. On Nov. 3, London High Court judge Matthew Nicklin dismissed his claim and refused the injunction. An interim order had temporarily protected his identity while his legal team considered an appeal. According to the report, his lawyers later told the court he was not well enough to decide whether to appeal, and no appeal was launched before his name was published.
Court Ruling Clears Publication
The ruling allowed news organizations to identify the subject of allegations that had been reported without his name, making the dispute over privacy and publication a public matter. It also means the claims can now be considered alongside Walliams’ response, rather than remaining under an anonymity order.
The allegations concern people who say they were young fans or junior workers when they encountered a famous entertainer. Their accounts raise questions about power differences and workplace conduct, but the reports do not establish that the alleged conduct occurred. Walliams’ denial is also part of the public record, and no criminal or civil finding against him is stated in the source material.
Popular right now
KitchenAid Artisan 5-Quart Tilt-Head Stand Mixer, Almond Cream
Ninja Foodi 10-Qt DualZone Smart XL Air Fryer, 6-in-1, DZ550
Ninja Foodi Air Fryer 10 Qt DualZone XL 6-in-1 Grey (DZ401)
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How the Anonymity Bid Ended
The Guardian and ITN had been investigating Walliams for months and sought to publish their reporting with his name. Walliams applied for an injunction to prevent both organizations from identifying him. On Nov. 3, Justice Matthew Nicklin ruled against that application, though an interim measure initially kept the name private while an appeal was considered.
During the case, Walliams’ lawyer, Sara Mansoori KC, told the court that he had attempted suicide twice and that publication could put him at further risk. The outlets argued they were not responsible for his mental health and said he should seek hospital treatment. The court ultimately refused the injunction. The reports also note that HarperCollins cut ties with Walliams last year following an internal investigation into alleged inappropriate behavior toward female employees.
“I am not a sexual predator. I have not broken the law.”
— David Walliams, in a statement reported by The Guardian
Allegations Still Unresolved
The allegations reported by The Guardian and ITN remain accounts attributed to sources; the supplied reporting does not describe a court ruling on whether they are true. Walliams denies being a sexual predator and denies breaking the law, while acknowledging that he sometimes behaved thoughtlessly in casual relationships. The full evidence behind each account, and whether any formal legal proceedings concerning the alleged conduct will follow, is not clear from the reports.
The source material also does not provide a response from every person or organization mentioned, or further detail about the outcome of HarperCollins’ internal investigation. The injunction decision concerned whether the outlets could publish his identity, not whether the allegations were proven.
Further Reporting and Responses
The Guardian and ITN have now published their reporting with Walliams’ identity. Further developments may include additional responses from Walliams, the women whose accounts were reported, or organizations connected to the allegations. No next court date or appeal is identified in the source material, and it is not clear whether any separate legal action will be filed.
Readers should distinguish the court’s decision on publication from a determination of the underlying claims: the anonymity bid was refused, while the allegations themselves remain disputed and unresolved in the reporting provided.
Key Questions
Who was the previously anonymous celebrity?
The Guardian identified the celebrity as David Walliams, a comedian and children’s book author.
What did the court decide?
On Nov. 3, Justice Matthew Nicklin dismissed Walliams’ claim and refused an injunction that would have stopped The Guardian and ITN from publishing his name.
What are the allegations?
The Guardian and ITN reported allegations from multiple women about sexual misconduct, including accounts from two women who said they were 15 when they met Walliams. These are allegations, not findings of fact by a court.
What has Walliams said?
Walliams denied being a sexual predator and said he had not broken the law. He also said he had sometimes behaved thoughtlessly toward people with whom he had casual sexual relationships.
Have the allegations been proven?
The supplied reports do not describe a court decision on the allegations. The ruling concerned whether Walliams could prevent publication of his identity, not whether the reported claims were true.
Source: pagesix.com
