◆ SpookStack

Be 2a oe a SOY EY PR 7h to overcome that rule of law. Christine Keeler had told her s people, including newspaper reporters, and it had been repeatadjom It was suggested that a writ for slander be issued against her onl “others, in respect of those statements. If such a writ were issued and the soewep were notified of it, the matter would become sub judice. Tie twapape would not, it was thought, publish her story because they would tein danger. of being in contempt of court—in respect of the slander action. This plan required a good deal of work, such as taking statements from witnesses, preparing draft writs and so forth, — (iti). Negotiations to that end - 96. While Preparing that plan, however, for legal proceedings, an alternative proposal was made, namely, to see Christine Keeler, to see how far she had gone with the newspaper and see if she could be persuaded not to publish her story. There were long conferences between Stephen Ward's counsel and Mr, Profumo’s solicitor on Saturday and Sunday, 2nd and 3rd February, 1963. Both felt that, if negotiations of this kind were to be pursued, it was very desirable that Christine Keeler, for her own protection, should be advised by a solicitor. It was essential that she should not be advised by the solicitor to the newspaper, but be separately advised by her own solicitor. In a day or two, Christine Keeler did go to a solicitor. It appears that on Saturday afternoon, 2nd February, 1963, Mr. Profumo’s solicitors went to see her, and, after some discussion about the contract, gave her the name of a solicitor and also their own telephone number. The impression they got was that she wanted money. But she did not go to the solicitor that they suggested. Then Stephen Ward's counsel sugested the name of another solicitor. He was a young man who was a former pupil of his at the bar and had since become a solicitor.(*) On Sunday, 3rd February, 1963, Stephen Ward’s counsel asked this young solicitor to come and see him and told him the outline of the story. There was an intervening approach through a friend and on the 4th February, 1963, at 4.30 p.m., Christine Keeler went to see this solicitor. She was accompanied, not by this friend, but by Paul Mann. 97, It is quite clear that the negotiations had these objectives: on the one hand Christine Keeler was to withdraw from her contract with the newspaper, so that her story would not be published, and she was to go away for a while immediately after the Edgecombe trial: on the other hand she was in return to be paid compensation in money for the loss of her contract and for the expenses to which she would be put. 98. The negotiations are of importance: because in the debate on 17th June, 1963, it was suggested by Sir Lionel Heald, Q.C., M.P., in the House of‘Commons that on 4th February, 1963, there was an approach which appeared to indicate a demand for money. (iv) The Law on the Matter 99. Now I desire to say, in fairness to all concerned, that-4 was nothing unlawful in these negotiations, provided always that y Keeler had aot the intention to extort money, but only to receive a fair recompense. (*) Mr. Gerald Black of Gerald Black & Co, 32 ‘ ai ¥