accusations that Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor, the Duke of Westminster,
was “Client 6” in the notorious FBI affidavit that exposed the Emperors’
Club VIP prostitution ring. About four hours later, every paper than
ran that story took it down. Because Grosvenor is the richest man in the
UK, and his rich-people lawyers (or
threatened all of them with libel suits. Selections from Gawker’s own
threatening attorney letter and a bit more on Grosvenor’s dirty past,
after the jump.
The fact is, no one seemed to actually have any evidence that the
duke was Client 6 (the duke’s lawyers say he was out of the country at
the time of Client 6’s tryst). It is known that the duke has
enjoyed the company of working girls—that’s why he was forced to step
down from his position in the ministry of defense—and some UK papers are
now running with the more cautious story that he was “allegedly” a client of the Emperors’ Club. But not necessarily the Client 6.
Of course, when the richest man in the country comes at you with
credible accusations of libel in the UK (where it is much easier to win a
libel suit), you stand down. Even the New York Daily News
rather unsubtly altered their story on the matter, now just reporting
on the old prostitution story and adding that the mysterious “Client 6”
was based in London. (As our own story on the matter was based entirely
on possibly bullshit and now disappeared stories from the UK press,
well, it’s down too.)
Shillings, the duke’s law firm, repeatedly emailed and called Gawker last night.
You are publishing a story concerning our client the Duke of
Westminster stating that he is “Client 6” as referred to in the FBI
indictment against the NY Governor. This is totally untrue and we
request it be taken down immediately. In fact, my client was not even in
London on the date referred to in the indictment, was in fact far away
in the countryside and had many people with him.
See? Many, many people. So no whoring!
from Blogger http://ift.tt/2blHYne