As Andrew Neil sues Boris Johnson’s binbagged lover Jennifer Arcuri after she tweets about him being in what some still call ‘Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book,’ Matthew Steeples reveals the truth of the curse of that little black book from someone else mentioned in it
In June 2020, Jennifer Arcuri responded to an article about her in The Steeple Times via Twitter’s messaging system. She described it as “insulting” and “inaccurate” and in spite of the fact that much of what we referenced had come from a previous interview that had been reported on by Pippa Allen-Kinross in the Mirror and Barbara McMahon in the Daily Mail, the one-time ‘Boris Bonker’ claimed it “embellished.”
In a series of private messages, Arcuri demanded: “Take it down” and when asked if she had asked the Daily Mail and Mirror to also take down the quotes to which she so objected (in spite of those remarks having been made by her own very self) announced: “I have lawyers working on that. As will this site for misquoting.” The Hacker House consultancy founder finished: “This piece is unnecessarily Nasty [sic] to me so I will go thru [sic] and make sure everything you print is not mis quoted [sic].”
Like journalist Pippa Allen-Kinross, whom I corresponded with by email, I subsequently heard no more from Jennifer Arcuri. Of her, Allen-Kinros remarked: “I personally haven’t been contacted by Ms Arcuri or anyone representing her… The source for the article was the Mail and they haven’t made any changes to the story, I would imagine that either they haven’t been contacted or they dismissed it. I have no reason to think they were published in error… Good luck!”
Now, with 72-year-old Andrew Neil – who has 1.1 million followers on Twitter – suing 37-year-old Arcuri – who has 63,700 followers – for defamation after the American publicly inaccurately claimed that the veteran Scottish broadcaster and journalist was on the “pedo elite train” because of his mention in an address book that many mistakenly purport to be that of Jeffrey Epstein, we today join those supporting him in his action against this hapless harpy. Neil, himself, responded by describing Arcuri’s comments as “evil lies” and “vile and untrue accusations.”
Responding to another Twitter user, Neil also added: ““I’ve never even met [Jeffrey Epstein], communicated with him, never mind visited any of his properties or been on his planes, cars, buses, helicopters, ponies. Now what is it you don’t understand about piss off. And apologise before you do, please, piss off.”
In other tweets, Neil remarked of why he was taking legal action against Arcuri. He stated:
“I’m taken this action not just to hold Acuri, who I’ve never met and have no interest in, to account but, more important, to establish that the Twitterati can’t just promulgate evil lies without consequences. IF you think anonymity will protect you, you’re in for a big surprise.”
“To whom it may concern. I have tonight commenced legal action against Jennifer Acuri. To those who have retweeted her vile and untrue accusations claiming or implying they have even a scintilla of veracity, my lawyers will also be coming after you. You have been warned.”
“My legal team has prepared a massive case against you and we’ll be seeking exemplary damages. Papers will be served in UK and US. I know you’ve been keeping your location private. But tell me, what’s it like in Panama City, Florida this time of year?”
Predictably from a woman with a penchant for attention and having the last word, Arcuri answered: “This guy is going to give himself a heart attack.”
As revealed in The Steeple Times previously, the infamous ‘little black book’ – which was leaked first by Gawker in redacted form in January 2015 and then in full by the cyber activists Anonymous in May 2020 – may have been found in Jeffrey Epstein’s Palm Beach pad, but in reality most of the people in it were not his connections. They were, in fact, those of his one-time lover Ghislaine Maxwell.
Mr Neil does indeed feature in that 95-page address book and has two address entries there, one in South Kensington, London and one in Midtown East, New York. Three telephone numbers and one email address for him are included.
Miss Arcuri’s error, however, is to have made an association only too commonly made and that is to assume that everyone listed in this address book was a “close” friend of Jeffrey Epstein. In fact, as was suggested by the fact checking site Snopes in February 2020: “While Epstein’s black book certainly gives some insight into his social connections, these contacts have also been described as ‘aspirational.’ In other words, not everyone listed in this book was an associate of Epstein’s. Some names in the book were people Epstein ‘aspired’ to connect with.”
Going further and speaking to The Steeple Times on the condition of anonymity last night, another person included in the ‘little black book’ told me: “I am listed in the address book. I never met or had heard of Jeffrey Epstein until this whole sordid saga unraveled, but I did know Ghislaine Maxwell socially, like I presume Andrew Neil did also, in New York and London. I believe my and Mr Neil’s mentions in that address book came about because of Ghislaine and not for any other reason.”
Asked of the implications of being referenced there, our source continued: “It has been nothing but a nightmare. I have been asked about it in social settings and I have always made clear that I did not even know who Jeffrey Epstein was. Ghislaine never mentioned him to me in the time that I knew her and I had not even seen her in ten years by the time she was arrested as we came to lead very different lives.”
“Being in that little black book is a curse when there was in fact no connection and though some people there clearly were very much more connected with Ghislaine Maxwell and some like Peter Mandelson, Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew are listed with many phone numbers, I had just two mentioned.”
“It is time that this address book was actually described correctly and referenced as ‘Ghislaine Maxwell’s little black book’ instead. I wish Mr Neil the best of British with his case against Jennifer Arcuri as what she tweeted was reprehensible and clearly very wrong. I would like to add that I think her a complete and utter disgrace.”
Support for Andrew Neil’s case against Jennifer Arcuri:
What does it say about “Bonking Boris” that he’s attracted to such deplorable specimens of womanhood.
Excellent article for highlighting the issue of defamation in context of the error of spreading misinformation & false accusations, invariably based on assumptions. not facts.
By comparison, seeing your thorough referencing shows the efforts real reporters take to provide credible news, insight & observations, )aka not just piffle)
(Hoping you may shed more light on the ‘cash for honours’ story by the way).
Even if Boris the beaver is a bit of a letch.
This wench should be taught to, engage the brain before opening her trap.
I hope Andrew Neil makes her pay.
It would also be nice to see the other loud mouthed nobody, I’m not a Lady Victoria Hervey, taken to task for her slanderous remarks towards Epstein and Maxwell’s victims, particularly Virginia Giuffre.
The pair of them should keep their traps shut, and stop trying to get publicity via the media.