David Walliams accused of violence and inappropriate sexual behaviour, which he denies

The author of books for children and British actor David Walliams is implicated in a joint investigation by ITV News and the Guardian published on 10 November 2026. Many women accuse of using their celebrity to get sex with teenage girls or young women. One describes a sexual assault when she was 15. Walliams, 55, denies the charges and claims to have not broken any law. [S2] [S5]

Separate testimony, disputed accusations

According to ITV News, the investigation lasted more than three years and involved alleged facts dating back to 2003. Several witnesses accuse Walliams of "grooming," a term that refers to trust and manipulation for sexual purposes. Some people have asked for anonymity for fear of reprisals or professional consequences. These testimonies are accusations reported by journalists, not facts established by a conviction. [S5]

A woman named Jade claims that Walliams contacted her on MySpace in 2007, when she was 15. According to his account, he then invited him to his home, where she claims to have been sexually assaulted. Walliams categorically denies any sexual contact with her. Another woman, called Alex, claims that a sexual relationship started when she was 17 years old; The author claims to have believed that she had 18 and contests any manipulation. [S2] [S5]

Lilly Creightmore, who testified under his name, said that he met Walliams at the age of 18 and had stayed at home in a difficult family environment. She describes pressures to share her bed and have sex. His lawyers replied that he regarded her as a close friend and denied inappropriate behaviour. In a letter to journalists, Walliams admits that he sometimes failed to respect partners, but rejects the idea of having abused his power. [S2]

Permissible publication, uncut guilt

The Sydney Morning Herald and the South China Morning Post report the same judicial aspect: Walliams had requested an injunction to prevent ITV News and the Guardian from identifying him. His lawyers cited a suicidal risk associated with the publication. Justice Matthew Nicklin rejected this request, while recognizing a serious psychiatric vulnerability that needed to be taken seriously. [S1] [S4]

The judge considered that the prohibition would constitute an exceptionally serious infringement of media rights. The representatives of the two drafts defended the public interest in information concerning possible abuse of power and reputation. This decision concerns the possibility of publishing: it does not deter the veracity of the charges. The judicial summary cited by the media indicates that certain conduct could constitute offences if proven. [S1] [S4]

Immediate professional consequences

The Independent Talent Group announced that it no longer represents Walliams after a suspension prior to publication. The BBC has initiated a review of the content it has written or in which it appears and withdraws certain programs, including Little Britain, during this review. These decisions therefore already have an effect on his professional representation and on public access to his works, regardless of any judicial outcome. [S3]

However, these measures must be distinguished from previous failures. HarperCollins had ceased working with the author in December 2025, following accusations of harassment he challenged. The World of David Walliams attraction of Alton Towers closed on November 3, 2026, but The Independent states that the link between this closure and the charges is not established. To present all these decisions as reactions to the 10 November publication would therefore be misleading. [S2] [S3]

Employers' responsibilities and uncertainties

The investigation also reports allegations of inappropriate behaviour in the environment of Britain's Got Talent and HarperCollins. Fremantle UK, the producer of the programme, claims that it has not received any complaints about Walliams and calls on those concerned to come forward. ITV points out that production assumes daily responsibility for the protection of participants and teams. These answers specifically raise the question of reporting mechanisms, without establishing by themselves what each organization knew. [S2]

The media consulted converge on the existence of the charges, their challenge and the failure of the injunction request. This convergence, however, does not constitute several independent surveys: their articles largely reflect the joint work of ITV News and the Guardian. They do not permit criminal proceedings to be established here. The distinction remains essential between the words of witnesses, decisions taken by professional partners and possible judicial determination of responsibilities. [S1] [S2] [S3] [S4] [S5]