▁whose ▁im partial ity ▁was ▁called ▁into ▁question ▁based ▁on ▁his ▁famil ial ▁relationship ▁to ▁the ▁pla int iff ▁( his ▁a unt ▁had ▁been ▁married ▁to ▁William ▁S inc la ir ) ▁and ▁who ▁was ▁hum ili ating ly ▁den ounced ▁by ▁G og art y ' s ▁coun sel ▁as ▁" the ▁b aw d ▁and ▁bl as ph emer ▁from ▁Paris ". ▁G og art y , ▁put ▁on ▁the ▁stand , ▁alleg ed ▁that ▁the ▁un named ▁Jews ▁of ▁the ▁vers es ▁were ▁par od ies ▁or ▁composite ▁characters ▁rather ▁than ▁deliber ate ▁ev oc ations ▁of ▁living ▁persons , ▁and ▁were ▁intended ▁to ▁throw ▁dis cred it ▁on ▁the ▁practice ▁of ▁us ury ▁and ▁m one yl ending ▁generally . ▁ ▁G og art y ▁ultimately ▁lost ▁the ▁law suit ▁and ▁was ▁ordered ▁to ▁pay ▁IR £ 9 0 0 ▁in ▁dam ages , ▁plus ▁court ▁costs ; ▁the ▁total ▁cost ▁to ▁him ▁was ▁£ 2 , 0 0 0 ▁( equ ivalent ▁to ▁well ▁over ▁€ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 ▁in ▁ 2 0 1 0 ▁terms ). ▁ ▁This ▁outcome ▁deeply ▁em bit tered ▁G og art y , ▁who ▁had ▁already ▁suffered ▁financial ▁set back s ▁after ▁the ▁Great ▁De pression ▁and ▁felt ▁that ▁the ▁trial ▁had ▁been ▁polit ically ▁motiv ated . ▁ ▁G og art y ' s ▁critics ▁differ ▁over ▁the ▁extent ▁to ▁which ▁the ▁language ▁of ▁the ▁off ending ▁pass ages ▁can ▁be ▁attributed ▁to ▁anti - S