This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/may/20/concert-pianist-james-rhodes-wins-right-to-publish-autobiography

The article has changed 12 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Pianist James Rhodes wins right to publish autobiography telling of abuse Pianist James Rhodes wins right to publish autobiography telling of abuse
(35 minutes later)
A British performing artist who had been prevented from publishing his autobiography can be named after the UK supreme court lifted the injunction that had banned him from publishing a full account of his own life. A British performing artist who has been prevented from publishing his autobiography can be named after the UK supreme court lifted the injunction that had banned him from publishing a full account of his own life.
The man who could be identified only as MLA during a year-long series of battles in the English courts is James Rhodes, the internationally renowned classical pianist. The man who could be identified only as MLA during a year-long series of battles in the English courts is James Rhodes, the internationally-renowned classical pianist.
The publishers of the book, who have been anonymised in previous court reports as STL, are in fact Canongate.
Rhodes’ autobiography details the serious sexual abuse that he suffered as a small child – he suffered spinal damage after being repeatedly raped by one of his teachers – and the way in which his art has helped him to cope with the trauma of his past.
He and Canongate were banned from publishing the book, however, after lawyers representing his ex-wife obtained a temporary injunction, arguing that its descriptions of the sexual abuse were so disturbing that their son would suffer catastrophic psychological distress if he were to read it.
Related: James Rhodes: a classical rocker with a passion for music in schoolsRelated: James Rhodes: a classical rocker with a passion for music in schools
The publisher of the book, who has been anonymised in previous court reports as STL, is Canongate. Their case hinged on an obscure piece of Victorian case law, known as Wilkinson v Downton, in which a man who played a practical joke on an east London pub landlady in 1897 was found to be guilty of the “intentional infliction of mental distress”.
Rhodes’s autobiography details sexual abuse suffered as a child, and the way in which his art helped him to cope with the trauma of his past. He and Canongate were banned from publishing the book after lawyers representing his former wife obtained an injunction, arguing that its descriptions of the sexual abuse were so disturbing that their son would suffer catastrophic psychological distress if he were to read it. After the high court rejected his wife’s request to have key parts of the book banned, the court of appeal imposed a temporary injunction, ordering that there should be a trial to decide whether or not the boy’s rights should take priority over those of his father. The supreme court decision overturns that ruling.
His ex-wife’s case hinged on an obscure piece of Victorian case law, known as Wilkinson v Downton, in which a man who played a practical joke on an east London pub landlady in 1897 was found to be guilty of the “intentional infliction of mental distress”. Delivering the judgment, Lord Toulson said: “Freedom to report the truth is a basic right to which the court gives a high level of protection, and the author’s right to his story includes the right to tell it as he wishes.
Rhodes, 40, was in court to hear that the injunction was being lifted, accompanied by his friend Benedict Cumberbatch, the actor. Rhodes has said he believes it is particularly important that the voices of survivors of sexual abuse are not stifled. “Imagine someone from Rotherham being told they can’t come forward and talk about what happened to them as a result of legal action.” “There is every justification for the publication. A person who has suffered in he way the appellant has suffered, and has struggled to cope with the consequences of his suffering in the way that he has struggled, has the right to tell the world about it. And there is the corresponding public interest in others being able to listen to his life story in all its searing detail.”
He was supported by human rights groups and a leading writers’ organisation, which feared that the injunction presented a serious risk to the right to freedom of expression. The court said that an order prohibiting the publication of the boy’s name would remain in force.
The writers’ association English PEN, Article 19 and Index on Censorship, which defend and promote free speech, argued that an earlier judgment by the court of appeal – which had ruled that there should be a high court trial to decide the dispute – could have had a chilling effect on other writers tackling difficult subjects, should it have been allowed to stand. Rhodes, 40, was at court to hear that the injunction was being lifted, accompanied by his wife, Hattie, and his friend Benedict Cumberbatch, the actor. Another friend, the actor and writer Stephen Fry, tweeted: “Full vindication from the Supreme Court. Victory at last for freedom of speech.”
Last year, 20 leading writers, including David Hare, Michael Frayn, William Boyd and Tom Stoppard, wrote to the Daily Telegraph to say they were “gravely concerned about the impact of this judgment on the freedom to read and write in Britain”.
Delivering Wednesday’s judgment, Lord Toulson said: “Freedom to report the truth is a basic right to which the court gives a high level of protection, and the author’s right to his story includes the right to tell it as he wishes.”
Rhodes’s autobiography, entitled Instrumental, will be published next week.
Outside the court, he said: “Clearly this is a victory for freedom of speech. Much more importantly it is a powerful message to survivors of sexual abuse.
“There is already too much stigma and shame surrounding mental health and sexual abuse. I’m relieved that our justice system has finally seen sense and not only allowed me to tell my story but affirmed in the strongest possible way that speaking up about one’s own life is a basic human right.”
His ex-wife obtained the injunction on behalf of the couple’s son after reading a leaked copy of the manuscript. The boy, who is approaching teenage years, has Asperger syndrome, attention deficit disorder and a number of other health problems.
Her lawyers denied that her case posed a threat to freedom of speech, saying it turned on specific facts concerning a vulnerable child and arguing that Rhodes had in the past recognised the need to protect his son from his history.
She moved back to the US after the couple’s divorce in 2009. Such was the secrecy surrounding the case before Wednesday’s ruling that an earlier court of appeal judgment described her as living in “Ruritania”, while their son was described in the judgment as having “dual British and Ruritanian nationality”.
While accepting that there was a public interest in the book being published, the appeal court had granted a temporary injunction and ruled that the question of whether the boy’s rights should take priority over those of his father should be decided at a full trial.
The supreme court ruling overturns that decision.
Responding to the judgment, Stephen Fry tweeted:
I’m still stupidly teary about all this. If you knew what @JRhodesPianist has been through just for telling the truth http://t.co/8eJ3b4LVnAI’m still stupidly teary about all this. If you knew what @JRhodesPianist has been through just for telling the truth http://t.co/8eJ3b4LVnA
Rhodes believes it is particularly important that the voices of survivors of sexual abuse are not stifled. “Clearly this is a victory for freedom of speech. Much more importantly it is a powerful message to survivors of sexual abuse.
“There is already too much stigma and shame surrounding mental health and sexual abuse I’m relived that our justice system has finally seen sense and not only allowed me to tell my story but affirmed in the strongest possible way that speaking up about one’s own life is a basic human right.”
He said that he hoped his book would help other survivors of abuse to find the courage to speak up, and that “it will inspire those in pain to find solace in music”.
He was supported by the writers’ association English PEN and the groups Article 19 and Index on Censorship, which defend and promote free speech, which all argued that the appeal court ruling could have had a chilling effect on other writers tackling difficult subjects, should it have been allowed to stand.
Those groups hailed the decision as an important verdict for free expression, and commended the court for its recognition that freedom to report the truth is a basic right protected in law.
Last year 20 leading writers, including David Hare, Michael Frayn, William Boyd and Tom Stoppard wrote to the Daily Telegraph to say they were “gravely concerned about the impact of this judgment on the freedom to read and write in Britain”.
Rhodes’ son, who is aged 12, is said by his mother to have Asperger’s, attention deficit disorder and a number of other health problems. Rhodes disputes some of the assessments of the boy’s health.
Lawyer’s representing the boy and his mother denied that her case posed a threat to freedom of speech, saying it turned in specific facts concerning a vulnerable child. They also argued that Rhodes had in the past recognised the need to protect his son from his own past history.
Following the couple’s divorce in 2009, the boy and his mother left the UK and settled in the country of her birth. Such has been the secrecy surrounding the case that the court of appeal judgment judgment described her as living in “Ruritania”, while their son was described as having “dual British and Ruritanian nationality”.
Rhodes’ autobiography, entitled Instrumental, will be published next week.