Katie Hopkins
- Thread starter securespark
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 24,816
- Reaction score
- 5,356
- Country
cool.From the A! overview
It appears to be in the Grauniad as wellcool.
Jack Monroe wins Twitter libel case against Katie Hopkins
Food writer and campaigner wins £24,000 from Mail Online columnist in row over tweets about damage to war memorial
www.theguardian.com
I thought only claimants had no win no fee but it appears they are available to both parties.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 24,816
- Reaction score
- 5,356
- Country
If costs can be awarded either way, you can go CFA. it does make it rather high risk though.
Anyway back to the debate, it was common ground, (judge, the claimant and the defendant) that the first tweet was a case of mistaken identity - referenced no less than 8 times in the judgement. 19, 22, 28, 49, 71-3,5,10 and 81.
I won't hold my breath for Nosenout and Notchy to apologise. Pete's summary was correct.
Anyway back to the debate, it was common ground, (judge, the claimant and the defendant) that the first tweet was a case of mistaken identity - referenced no less than 8 times in the judgement. 19, 22, 28, 49, 71-3,5,10 and 81.
I won't hold my breath for Nosenout and Notchy to apologise. Pete's summary was correct.
She had a choice. Court or settle. She chose court boyo no matter how you spin it. And lost. Massive. To a lefty lesbian. Jack's victory could not have been sweeter.
Hopkins - RWR lying scumbag. Right up your alley MBK.
Irrelevant.
Subsequent arrogance from scumbag Hopkins is what landed her in court. She could have settled the dispute out of court. She chose not to. Mistaken identity my arse.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 24,816
- Reaction score
- 5,356
- Country
8 times the mistake is mentioned in the judgement. But Nosenout persists in being stupid, as well as misquoting me.
Makes no odds.
She was prepared to settle out of court. It was Hopkins own stubbornness that led to court action...
Monroe asked for a retraction via Twitter and was blocked by Hopkins. Monroe asked Hopkins to make a public apology and give £5,000 to "migrant rescue" as a settlement to prevent the matter going to court.[4] Hopkins did neither, and the matter proceeded to court.
Spin it all you like boyo, but you are way off the mark as per.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 24,816
- Reaction score
- 5,356
- Country
Still not correct - why don't you read the judgement its all there.
No need to make up your own version.
No need to make up your own version.
Which came long after Monroe sued, after giving Hopkins a chance to apologise. She didn't. So she sued. The mistaken identity thing was merely food for the lawyers. It wasn't the reason Monroe began court proceedings, far from it. Your spin or the judgement does not change this fact.
But it was the reason that this whole thing started in the first place. Which is all anybody on here has claimed.
The debate for me was what led to Monroe deciding to sue. It was after Hopkins found out she'd made her mistake, but doubled down on her rant (she sent more harmful texts) even though she knew she'd mixed up the two people. This and the fact that she refused to apologise.
Stupid entitled revolting lying scumbag. Taken to court by a 'woke lefty lesbian' and got owned.
Sweet justice.
I don't think anybody had disagreed with you that those were the reasons Monroe sued.
Litigation wasn't a thing even after the the mistaken identity revelation. What did it for Monroe occurred AFTER Hopkins had realised her mistake, i.e. no contrition/apology from Hopkins and the fact that she doubled down on her vile texts. The RWR gobshíte thought she'd bag herself a 'lefty lesbian', but instead got owned.
Monroe was reluctant to sue from the outset.
Sweet as a nut.
- Status
