In my writ I named not only Gable, but his printer, and Housmans Bookshop; the second writ included no less than twelve defendants, most of whom were represented by Bindman & Partners, who are very experienced in the field of civil litigation. In a libel action, a bookshop may avail itself of a defence of innocent dissemination, but Housmans did not, probably because Bindman's advised them that in view of the nature of some of the publications they stocked - and continue to stock - such a defence would not have succeeded. Whatever, they pleaded justification and fair comment, ie they stood by the magazine articles.
This leaflet was found by my colleague Mark Taha on a visit to the shop when I was well into the libel actions; there was a pile of them on the counter. In it, Moseley denounces Gable as a damned liar, a Secret State "asset" AND accuses him of attempting to incite violence against Larry O'Hara - whose name Gable had linked with mine in the first article. Presumably the management of Housmans cleared this leaflet for distribution at the shop (and for all I know may have contributed to it).
The leaflet is a candid admission that Housmans did not believe their defence. Up to this point, they had defended my actions with some vigour, but when this letter was brought to the attention of their lawyers, the bookshop settled in double quick time, paid me damages, costs, and published an apology in Peace News.
But the most remarkable aspect of this entire affair is that while Moseley & co were slagging off Gable and accusing him of trying to set up their chum O'Hara to be physically attacked (by leftists, not by the far right as he claims), they were continuing to stock his magazine, and indeed they only discontinued selling it when Mark issued his (somewhat belated) libel writ against the Gable gang.
The service of the first writ is discussed here: http://www.archive.org/details/Hansard-HomeAffairsCommitteeFirstSpecialReport-InterruptionTo
