I went to a party where I had three glasses of wine. By 10pm I was feeling tired, as I often do at parties, and I slept until 1am.

I got up at 1am, I had two dances with Emma (Beal) and then somebody accused her of having smoked a cigarette and we had a row.

He then jumped on me, technically an assault, and brought me to the ground

We went out into the street rather than have the row inside the house. After a minute or two we said "Well, let's go home". I mean, the party was effectively over for us.

We then went inside where Emma collected her bag and her coat and we went out again.

We walked around the corner. At the point where Emma was reaching into her bag to get her car keys Robin Hedges came running round the corner waving his arms, saying: "Help, help".

'He jumped on me'

He had been told by someone that I was attacking Emma or presumably a row had been enlarged as it passed from person to person in the party.

He then jumped on me, technically an assault, and brought me to the ground. He then continued to try and keep me there.

I struggled to get up. Emma went back into the house. Her sister Kate came out.

Lots of other people at the party came out and I struggled my way back to the house.

As I was going up the stairs several people were on the stairs. I got to the top of the stairs and I could still hear Robin shouting.

The fall

By this time he was still several feet behind me. He was either on the first step of those stairs or he was actually at the base of the stairs and was shouting.

As I looked back I clearly saw as he tried to get round the other people he was leaning over the edge of what is a very low wall.

I did not push him, nobody pushed him, it was an accident.

I turned, I can't remember if I knocked on the door knocker or rang the bell, and within seconds I heard a woman's voice saying "Someone has fallen over".

I did not see it. I was 180 degrees, my face was turned 180 degrees away from what happened and not the slightest doubt that he struggled to get up the stairs, struggling round people he overbalanced and fell.

I did not push him, nobody pushed him. It was an accident. This is exactly the sort of thing that can happen to anybody.

Robin was not motivated by malice. He had been led to believe that my argument with Emma had turned nasty and he rushed out to intervene to stop it.

'Unacceptable pressure'

Kate Beal, who came round the corner at the time he had jumped on me, will confirm that. Emma actually was standing there as he jumped on me.

I feel no malice towards Robin because he was motivated solely by desire to protect his oldest and closest friend.

I feel that the conduct of The Standard in this event has been a disgrace.

It was a mistake on his part. He has suffered terribly from that, not just the physical pain, the cancelled holiday but I suspect unrelenting and totally unacceptable media pressure on someone who should be left to recover."

The position in all of this is that I suspect that incident should have occupied a paragraph in the Islington Gazette under a small headline 'Man falls at party'.

'Weasel words'

Londoners will ask themselves, as I am sure will the assembly, does that incident justify four full front pages of the Evening Standard, two double page spreads and several other articles which have been extremely free with the facts.

The weasel words of the Standard's libel lawyers inserted here and there with 'alleged' and so on doesn't hide the fact the Evening Standard set out to characterise this as my having pushed Robin Hedges over a wall.

The two basic sets of statements in the papers are from Stuart Williams, the next door neighbour, and Robin.

On their first account on the 31 May they refer to an anonymous neighbour who merely announces that he was awoken by the thud of someone falling.

There are only two flats where that could have happened.

The ground floor flat and the basement flat.

Sudden recall?

I am told by Kate Beal that the basement flat was unoccupied all weekend so we assume, therefore, that this is Mr Williams' first comment on the events and nothing in that would give me cause for concern.

Two weeks later Mr Williams, by this time named, has developed total recall of all conversations he heard even though he admits in an incident that lasted eight to ten minutes at most he went in and out of his bed three times.

Whether this would stand up in court and anyone who saw him on the TV would realise that his recall isn't quite as perfect as The Standard had made out.

Then we have the change between what Robin said to The Standard on the 31 May.

The statement he put out after he saw and after he had said to Emma 'I did not say these things', and then what he said on the 20 June after my statement to you.

'Out of character'

Once again, Robin who claimed to have been unconscious throughout most of this has also developed perfect recall.

I don't blame Robin and I don't blame Stuart Williams. I think both people have been put under relentless pressure, and we all know the game of journalists who will ask a question to which you may say 'no' or 'yes' and then they put into your mouth the actual question they have asked.

I feel that the conduct of The Standard in this event has been a disgrace.

It could have occurred to the editor Veronica Wadley when she first heard this story that it might be out of character.

In the 21 years that I have been in the focus of public attention and unrelenting media attention there has never been a single story linking me to violence or linking me to drunkenness.

Perhaps if Max Hastings had still been editor he may have paused and considered whether there shouldn't have been some more detailed investigation before they ran with this story.

Detection work

Having run with this story they have consistently tried to justify it.

We are told in the article on 14 June that the Evening Standard reporters had re-created the events of the evening.

Well re-created, I hope they never have to do any re-creation on anybody surgically because I have to say this.

The truth is editors have more power than any cabinet minister

On their first account of 31 May they describe Robin Hedges as falling 12ft over a wall. Two weeks later this has become 15ft over a wall.

Well the laws of physics will need to be re-written I felt. So, yesterday after lunchtime, in my own time, I got the train to Tufnell Park, I took my own tape measure and I measured this miraculous wall.

This wall that could be the eighth wonder of the world. It is 10ft tall.

Now I can understand a reporter may make a mistake of 10ft being two if you're not measuring it. But who took the decision in the Standard in that fortnight to change the height of the wall.

Press power

And if London's evening paper can't get the height of the wall accurate to within 50% why should we trust anything else they write.

If we are told by the editor of the Evening Standard that this is a careful reconstruction of events you would assume that on the simple basic physical facts that could be measured they might have actually gone and done it.

So I really do look forward to hearing later on in the later editions of the paper today about the miraculous event of this wall.

The truth is editors have more power than any cabinet minister. They have the power to besmirch a reputation and end a career.

Now that power should only be used with the greatest of restraint.

I think Londoners and the assembly have the right to say was that the case in this instance.

I believe Veronica Wadley was reckless with the facts and malicious with that power.

For five weeks we have had the Evening Standard trying to bring my mayoralty to an end, to ruin my reputation and hopefully, from their view-point, force me into resignation.

'Wrong' quotes

Fortunately for me Londoners decide who is to be Mayor not editors, otherwise I wouldn't have been in this position in the first place.

Finally I just want to say this, I think we need several answers.

Why is it The Evening Standard has still not printed the letter they received from Women's Aid when they carried a story saying Women's Aid had attacked me? and quoting somebody called Rosemary Jackson.

I have here the letter sent to the editor of The Evening Standard on June 20th from Nicola Harwin, the director of Women's Aid.

In it she says: "In fact Rosemary Jackson is a voluntary member of Luton Women's Aid, a local refugee service outside London, which is a member of Women's Aid national network of domestic violence service.

"She was telephoned by an Evening Standard reporter whose name was Sharon on the evening of Sunday 16th June.

"Rosemary has confirmed that she suggested the reporter should be contacting a London representative of Women's Aid rather than herself.

"Rosemary insists that she spoke only generally about how to tackle domestic violence and not in relation to any individual.

"Rosemary denies calling for the Mayor's resignation."

Key questions

Why hasn't the Evening Standard published that letter or any of the others I have referred to?

Why have they not published the letter they received from Kate and Emma and Mike Furness denying the words put in their mouth in the article quoting Robin Hedges.

I want also to have an undertaking from The Evening Standard that Robin is not going to be victimised from this.

He made a mistake. He wasn't malicious and I hope we are now not going to see him made a scapegoat as The Evening Standard story collapses.

Also given the hypocrisy of some journalists claiming their concern here is for Emma, I would like to say those photographers and cameramen who stayed outside my front door this morning to get a picture of her are harassing her and nobody who is pregnant should be subject to that.

I want them to stop pestering us. I left the house. I was happy to be photographed as I did so. I want them to leave Emma alone.

And finally, I would just like to thank Londoners because I got used to the fact that I don't worry what's in the paper.

'Unacceptable journalism'

I worry about what Londoners say to me and over the past five weeks increasingly as time has worn on it is Londoners who have stopped me on the Tube and on the street to tell me they don't believe what they read in The Standard and I have their support and I thank them for that.

It has been very important in getting through a difficult period. I also say this to Veronica Wadley: This is not acceptable journalism and until we can have a proper answer from Veronica Wadley on how this story grew in the telling.

The reality is I don't believe, I won't believe what I read in The Standard and I simply warn Londoners now: Don't believe anything you read about my policies or my private life in this paper until it's got a new editor.

The Evening Standard has alleged that GLA officials put pressure on Mr Hedges to make his original statement.

This is entirely untrue. At no time have I or any GLA official spoken to Mr Hedges since the evening of the accident.

Misuse of resources?

Emma Beal did speak to Mr Hedges in her capacity as one of his oldest and best friends and they agreed a statement after a series of conversations made from Emma Beal's personal mobile phone.

Simon Fletcher was present for part of one of these phone calls but not any of the others.

The statement that was agreed with Robin was given to me by Emma.

I contacted my chief of staff and told him to give it to the GLA press office for release.

It has been suggested by the Evening Standard that even thought they asked the GLA press office for my response the GLA press office releasing this statement was a misuse of GLA resources. This is not the case.

It was a lawful and proper use of the press office to release Mr Hedge's statement because it was relevant to an allegation which if true could be said to bring the Mayoralty into disrepute.

This has been confirmed by the GLA legal team and leading counsel.

I have taken legal advice on this from leading counsel.

I have been advised that there is nothing unlawful and the Greater London Authority disclosing information in its possession which related to allegations which, if true, might be said to bring the office of mayor into disrepute.