I posted a blog here and linked to it on X (formerly Twitter), the blog 'The True Story of the making of the book of 'We're Going on a Bear Hunt' ('Bear Hunt')'.
Since then, people have raised questions about me being sued for libel in relation to Bear Hunt. Some people have claimed that:
a) I didn't write Bear Hunt and therefore
b) I had no right to complain that it had something superimposed on it in a tweet in May 2021, and that,
c) I had no right to complain that the words in the tweet were anything to do with me.
What follows is what the people (the 'Claimant' and the 'Claimant's solicitor') who sued me for libel wrote about this. You'll see that it's precisely the opposite of these points (a), b) and c) above when they sued me. As follows:
(I'm the 'Defendant'.)
1.
"The words Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion were superimposed on the book being held by Mr Corbyn. The book is a children’s book written by the Defendant, We’re Going on a Bear Hunt.'
2.
"The caption in the Claimant’s Tweet is a corruption of words taken from We’re going on a bear hunt."
(These two points are taken from the Particulars of Claim - ie the document sent to a Defendant (in this case me) if you're suing someone for libel.)
---------
If there's any doubt about what this means, then something similar was written by the Claimant when writing to his university:
1.
"The words accompanying the image were a pastiche and parody of Michael Rosen’s book “We’re Going on a Bearhunt”."
2.
"In so doing, I echoed the use Mr Rosen has himself made of those words for political purposes."
(These two come from a Subject Access Request.)
------
To draw this together, I'll make the point that as the Claimant accepted that the words in 'We're Going on a Bear Hunt' are by me, and that the words on the tweet were a 'parody' and a 'pastiche' of Bear Hunt and that these words 'echoed' what I had done with the words from Bear Hunt, there really is no point in people writing statements on 'X' or anywhere else to the effect that I didn't write Bear Hunt, or that the words in the tweet were nothing to do with me. In effect, it's not me contradicting such statements, it's the statements from the Claimant that I've quoted above.
