Jury To See Films Of Liberace’s Tv Performances (Press, 11 June 1959)

On 10 June 1959, in London, the trial of famous American pianist and entertainer Liberace against the "Daily Mirror" and its columnist William Connor commenced its second day in Court. Liberace is suing for libel, alleging that articles published in 1956 had severely damaged his reputation and implied he was a homosexual. During the proceedings, it was suggested that the jury might view films of Liberace’s television performances to determine the nature of his act—whether it was suggestive or not. In his testimony, Liberace continued to assert that the articles had attacked his morals and led to significant personal distress, including the illness of his mother. He is seeking unspecified damages for the contents of the articles, which he claims were malicious in intent. The defendants argue that the statements made were true and constituted fair commentary, prompting Liberace to rebut their claims vigorously. The spectator gallery remained crowded, predominantly with female attendees. Liberace reacted strongly when a song about him, performed by comedian Jimmy Thompson, was presented to the jury. The lyrics playfully suggested his correspondence was mainly from women seeking his affection. Liberace claimed to have been unaware of the song's suggestive nature and expressed shock at its portrayal of him. During questioning, Liberace denied any intent to exploit sex appeal in his performances and rejected claims that he had engaged in any deceptive practices regarding his persona. He addressed accusations regarding his public image, asserting, "I have never considered myself as a sex-appeal artist." Responses regarding his grooming habits included using after-shave and deodorants, but no perfumes, affirming that his appeal was not based on sexuality but on his talent and connection with audiences. Throughout the inquiry, Liberace emphasised the emotional impact of the articles on his life and career, indicating a broader narrative of public perception surrounding his image. He referenced how the implications of the articles caused anguish and mockery, stating it had taken a toll not only on him but also on those close to him. As the hearing continued, the nature of his presentations came under scrutiny, including a performance that featured a nun and a child, which he attributed to audience enjoyment rather than any sexual connotation. Liberace expressed admiration for entertainment icons like Marilyn Monroe but declined to compare himself to them. The legal proceedings drew considerable media attention, highlighting cultural tensions surrounding celebrity, sexuality, and the boundaries of public comment. The lawyer for the defendants sought to undermine Liberace's claims by paralleling his performances with established norms of entertainment while Liberace stood firm in his denial of the allegations against him, firmly positioning the trial as not just a personal matter but a fight for his reputation. The case was set to resume the following day, with no details revealed about the amount of damages being sought in the trial, a procedural nuance due to the differing legal standards in England compared to New Zealand.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand