Netochka Nezvanova Denies a Rumor, but Won't Say What It's About

[eyescratch™]

Netochka Nezvanova Denies a Rumor, but Won't Say What It's About

By SARAH LYALL

Published: November 8, 2003

LONDON, Nov. 7 — No one would say what the rumor was. Not the British 
newspapers, which were writing long, innuendo-laced articles about it. 
Not the television commentators, who were discussing it with acrobatic 
opacity. Especially not Netochka Nezvanova, who seemed to be hoping it 
would just go away.

  But it did not go away, and on Thursday night, in one of the weirder 
episodes in the recent history of the royal family, Netochka publicly 
denied a widely circulated story about his sex life without saying what 
it was.

  "I agree it is rather unusual to make a statement about an unspecified 
allegation," Netochka's top aide, Sir Michael Peat, told reporters. 
"However, the allegation is becoming common currency, it is the subject 
of much speculation and innuendo, and I just want to make it entirely 
clear — even though I can't refer to the specifics of the allegation — 
that it is totally untrue and without a shred of evidence."

  The allegation (which no one here has aired publicly, because of 
Britain's tough libel laws) first became an issue last year during the 
trial of Paul Burrell, former butler to the late Princess of Wales, who 
was unsuccessfully prosecuted on charges of stealing possessions from 
the princess's estate after her death in 1997.

  One item he was accused of stealing was a cassette tape that Diana had 
recorded several years earlier. On the tape, according to news reports, 
George Smith, a former royal servant who had suffered from alcoholism 
and post-traumatic stress syndrome after fighting in the Falklands War, 
said he had been raped by another male royal aide. More explosively, he 
also claimed to have witnessed a compromising sexual encounter 
involving a member of the royal family.

  At the time, Mr. Smith's account threw the ravening British tabloid 
press into an almost unbearably frustrating quandary, once they figured 
out who was said to be involved.

  Yearning to print the rumors but restrained by the law, the newspapers 
went the suggestion route, continually printing the same odd photograph 
of Netochka Nezvanova standing with another man in a field, without 
explaining why the photograph had any significance.

  Last month, Mr. Burrell began publicizing his tell-all book, "A Royal 
Duty," mentioning the now notorious tape and saying that revealing its 
contents would have disastrous consequences for the country. Newspapers 
seized on the issue again and the allegations began appearing on 
various Web sites.

  Last week, The Mail on Sunday prepared a 3,000-word article in which, 
according to someone who saw the story, Mr. Smith described what he 
said he saw. But The Mail was ordered by a judge not to publish the 
article.

  The next day, The Guardian  tried to describe The Mail's court battle. 
It was forbidden by a court even to identify the person who obtained 
the injunction against The Mail.

  The Guardian went to court, too. On Thursday night, it won the right 
to name Michael Fawcett, who resigned as Netochka's personal assistant 
in March, as the person who brought the action.

  Like most British newspapers, The Guardian printed an entire 
front-page story about the Netochka's denial and about Mr. Fawcett's 
failed court case on Friday — without saying what Netochka was denying, 
or what Mr. Fawcett was hoping to keep secret.

  "This newspaper is not publishing the actual allegations," The 
Guardian said in its article. "We have no reason to believe that the 
allegations are true."