THE person on trial at The Hague is, according to the prosecution, a monster responsible for some of the most horrific acts of the last century.
Yet by the close of yesterday’s bizarre proceedings in the Special Court for Sierra Leone, it seemed that it was the reputation of supermodel Naomi Campbell which was at stake.
Charles Taylor, the former President of Liberia who is on trial for war crimes, sat at the back of the court in a neat suit, head on hands, a mere sideshow as Carole White, gave evidence challenging the model’s version of events at a party hosted 13 years earlier by Nelson Mandela.
Mr Taylor arranged to gift several “blood diamonds” to Naomi Campbell as the African warlord flirted with her over dinner, her former agent said in court.
In stark contrast to Ms Campbell’s own sworn version of events, Carole White, 60, told how the model excitedly awaited the arrival of the stones after a star-studded party in Pretoria in 1997.
Ms White and the actress Mia Farrow described how the supermodel had boasted of being given diamonds by the warlord, contradicting Ms Campbell’s insistence in court last week that she could not be sure who had given her the gift.
It was claimed that Ms White had a clear target in her sights, the model, with whom she has had a spectacular falling out and whose reputation she was subsequently trying to tarnish. That was the theory of Mr Taylor’s defence team and it was hard not to disagree as the background to the “Mother Agent’s” appearance in court unfolded and her composure began to crumble.
A party thrown by Ms White’s staff on the night of Ms Campbell’s testimony at the trial last week did not exactly help her. “Did you have a blood diamond party in your offices?” asked Courtenay Griffiths, the fearsome QC acting for Mr Taylor, who had palpably bonded with Ms Campbell last week.
“I am sorry, it was nothing to do with a blood diamond party,” said a startled Ms White, who had earlier told the court that Ms Campbell was flirting with the African warlord at Mr Mandela’s house.
“Did no one refer to it as a blood diamond party or blood diamond night?” the QC persisted. “Not to my knowledge,” said Ms White, looking increasingly agitated as Mr Griffiths asked her to read the caption on one of her employee’s Facebook page. The picture showed several of Ms White’s staff drinking, smoking and laughing.
“Blood diamond night,” Ms White read from the website, her eyes suddenly bloodshot, her lips quivering. “Does it surprise you?” asked Mr Griffiths. “It does surprise me … because I am not crass enough to arrange something like that.”
But the damage was done. A comment on the website referred to Ms Campbell’s remark that testifying at the Taylor trial had been “a big inconvenience”. One of Ms White’s staff had written: “When she said that, the whole agency laughed, wait for Carole to bring her down on Monday at The Hague.”
In the background of the party photograph, the figure of Ms White was clearly visible. It was her who was being brought down.
“Have you got any plans for this evening?” Mr Griffiths suddenly asked Ms White. “I was thinking I might be on a flight back to London,” she said, as calmly as she could.
“Are you not due to be interviewed live for the Anderson Cooper show for CNN?” Ms White stalled. It was being discussed with her attorney, she said. Pressed on whether it had been agreed, she said that maybe her attorney had agreed. Again the damage was done – she was portrayed as seeking to milk the court appearance for every ounce of publicity value.
Ms White and Ms Campbell had been extremely close for 15 years. “I found her work, negotiated contracts for her. I got the best deal I could, I did all the logistics, all the arrangements … I basically did the lot for her to make her life less stressful,” she said.
That was then. Two years ago came the falling out, over a contract to market and sell perfume, with Ms White cut in for 25 per cent. Mr Griffiths had to drag out of her exactly how much she stood to gain from winning her multimillion-dollar lawsuit against her former protegee.
“You were losing between $300,000 and $500,000 a year,” Mr Griffiths suggested. “I am not sure, I was losing about $300,000 a year I would say.” This was not just for two previous years but for 10 or 20 years in the future, she eventually conceded.
“I am going to suggest to you in due course that you have a very powerful motive for lying about Ms Campbell,” said Mr Griffiths. “I am suggesting that your motive in lying about Naomi Campbell is to provide ammunition for use against her in the lawsuit.”
Ms White responded: “That’s not true.”
Moreover, Mr Grifiths pointed out, it was her lawyer in this case who had “urged” her to contact the Special Court for Sierra Leone, as Ms White had admitted in her own statement to the court in May. Why? “He thought it was important when he realised it was important to this trial,” she insisted.
Mr Griffiths was not finished. “Did your lawyer say to you, this could assist you in your claim against Naomi Campbell?”
“No,” said Ms White.
A similar character assasination was performed on Mia Farrow, the Hollywood actress who claimed to have heard Ms Campbell say at breakfast that she had been given a huge diamond by Mr Taylor.
Other witnesses have all referred to diamonds, plural. “I think I would have remembered diamonds in the plural,” Ms Farrow said, calling it “sort of an unforgettable moment”.
Mr Taylor’s defence played a video of Ms Farrow calling for support for the International Criminal Court to try Omar al-Bashir of Sudan for genocide in Sudan or “every thug who hacks his way to power will have a sense of impunity”.
She was asked: “It is correct that in your view Omar al-Bashir is guilty?”
Ms Farrow: “My view is that he is guilty.”
Question: “Even though he has not yet been tried?”
Ms Farrow: “He is guilty in my view.”
She was asked whether she might have been influenced by the film Blood Diamond, which focused on one large gemstone. Judge Sebutinde intervened to ask a second time. “No, Your Honour,” said Ms Farrow. “She may not have used the word huge but she did say diamond.”
Her testimony was beginning to unravel.
Mr Griffiths was uncharitable. “I think the actress Mia Farrow is certainly playing another role – Mother Teresa of Africa. That is the title of her new film.”
Before adjourning, Judge Sebutinde warned Ms White not to discuss her evidence with anyone before the court resumed this morning.
“I must caution you, you’re not to discuss your evidence with anybody, that includes your lawyer in court. Do not discuss your evidence with anybody.” So no interview with Anderson Cooper, then.
Be the first to comment