Katie Hopkins

[noseall]

Her actions suggest otherwise.

If I say I want £100 for a cement mixer and then you say done, If I then say I want £200 for it. Do you think the offer of £100 still stands? Surely you aren't that stupid.

The offer changed. Given it have been complied with and yet the threats continued. It clearly had been rescinded and replaced with new demands.

The offer was amended.

She always had the ability to kill proceeding - Section 2 of the Defamation Act - Offer of Amends. This was available right up until proceedings had been issued.

Hopkins' rights are irrelevant of any offer on or off the table, from the claimant.

20 - a different offer
21 - offer retracted.

I never asked if it changed or was ammended. Please show where the offer for Hopkins to apologise and end proceedings, was rescinded after 38 minutes. FFS.
And explain how come after three days, and the months leading up to court, she still had the ability to retract apologise and end proceedings, if it was rapidly retracted after 38 mins.

The demand for an apology was not sincere.

Lies.

Monroe’s offer was not sincere and rapidly retracted

More lies.

 

[motorbiking]

I never adked if it changed or was ammended. Please show where the offer for Hopkins to apologise and end proceedings, was rescinded, FFS.
And explain how come after three days, and the months leading up to court, she still had the ability to retract apologise and end proceedings?

If I change or amend an offer - is the first one still available?

Please show where the offer for Hopkins to apologise and end proceedings, was rescinded, FFS.

There was no such offer.

The offers were:

1. Delete it
2. apologise, pay and be humiliated.
3. make an offer of amends as set out in the letter.
4 all offers are rescinded. We are suing.

 

[noseall]

20 - a different offer

Irrelevant. Hopkins still had the ability to apologise and end proceedings.

21 - offer retracted.

Three days after the twitter spat, not 38 mins.

 

[motorbiking]

Irrelevant. Hopkins still had the ability to apologise and end proceedings.

Three days after the twitter spat, not 38 mins.

No she didn't, she had the ability to make an offer of that. But there was no guarantee it would end proceedings. It was certainly never an offer made by Monroe or her team.

A reminder:

There was no such offer.

The offers were:

1. Delete it
2. apologise, pay and be humiliated.
3. make an offer of amends as set out in the letter.
4 all offers are rescinded. We are suing.

 

[noseall]

l5m

If I change or amend an offer - is the first one still available?

Irrelevant. There was no pause in the time frame whereby Hopkins could apologise, retract and end proceedings.

Therefore...

The demand for an apology was not sincere.

Lies.

Monroe’s offer was not sincere and rapidly retracted

More lies.
A reminder....
“These proceedings have been a nightmare,” Monroe told the court. “It has been an 18-month, unproductive, devastating nightmare.

“I did not want to be here today. I have offered several times though my lawyer to settle these proceedings outside court. This is the last thing that I wanted to be doing.”

Another reminder....
“These proceedings have been a nightmare,” Monroe told the court. “It has been an 18-month, unproductive, devastating nightmare.

“I did not want to be here today. I have offered several times though my lawyer to settle these proceedings outside court. This is the last thing that I wanted to be doing.”

 

[noseall]

No she didn't, she had the ability to make an offer of that. But there was no guarantee it would end proceedings.

Apart from the fact that Monre said that if she retracted, apologised donated - it would.

The demand for an apology was not sincere.

Lies.

Monroe’s offer was not sincere and rapidly retracted

More lies.

 

[motorbiking]

Irrelevant. There was no pause in the time frame whereby Hopkins could apologise, retract and end proceedings.

Irrelevant. Hopkins still had the ability to apologise and end proceedings.

you seem confused.

Apart from the fact that Monre said that if she retracted, apologised donated - it would.

She also said delete it or I will get my lawyer involved. The tweet was deleted and yet.. she sued.

 

[noseall]

you seem confused.

Nonsense.

The demand for an apology was not sincere.

Lies.

Monroe’s offer was not sincere and rapidly retracted

More lies.

Show where her offer was rapidly retracted please?

 

[noseall]

If I change or amend an offer - is the first one still available?

Show where she amended the offer? The offer was made (point 4) at 8:14 pm....
At 8.14pm Ms Monroe tweeted again, this time using Ms Hopkins’ Twitter handle: “Dear @KTHopkins, public apology +£5k to migrant rescue & I won’t sue. It’ll be cheaper for you and v. satisfying for me.”

Please show where this offer was either rapidly retracted, amended or at any point Hopkins was denied the opportunity to settle out of court, on those terms.

 

[motorbiking]

17.3, 17.4

Hopkins was never asked to apologies and retract as an offer of settlement.

why don't you go back and read the whole thing again. You are all over the place.

 

[motorbiking]

Show where she amended the offer? The offer was made (point 4) at 8:14 pm....
At 8.14pm Ms Monroe tweeted again, this time using Ms Hopkins’ Twitter handle: “Dear @KTHopkins, public apology +£5k to migrant rescue & I won’t sue. It’ll be cheaper for you and v. satisfying for me.”

Please show where this offer was either rapidly retracted, amended or at any point Hopkins was denied the opportunity to settle out of court, on those terms.

The first offer was 7:36pm. The above is the amendment. 38 minutes later.

 

[noseall]

She also said delete it or I will get my lawyer involved. The tweet was deleted and yet.. she sued.

She made the offer (retract/apologise/donate) to KH at 8:14.

Show where the offer was rapidly retracted?

Show where the offer was ammended?

Show where Hopkins was denied the chance to settle, under conditions of the offer?

The demand for an apology was not sincere.

Lies.

Monroe’s offer was not sincere and rapidly retracted

More lies.

 

[motorbiking]

She made the offer (retract/apologise/donate) to KH at 8:14.

This is the amendment to this offer - Ms Monroe tweeted again at 7.36pm: “I’m asking you nicely to please delete this lie Katie, and if I have to ask again it will be through my lawyer.”
is the firs offer.

Show where the offer was rapidly retracted?


Show where the offer was ammended?

already done - 38 minutes after the above.

Show where Hopkins was denied the chance to settle, under conditions of the offer?

She complied with the first offer, within 2 hours and 11 minutes.

She had every possibility to make an offer of amends under sec 2 of the deflation act.

Its getting a little boring to have to keep explaining this to you.

 

[noseall]

The first offer was 7:36pm.

What offer?

The above is the amendment. 38 minutes later.

What amendment? JM made her offer at 8:14. What are you going on about?

 

[noseall]

Ms Monroe tweeted again at 7.36pm: “I’m asking you nicely to please delete this lie Katie, and if I have to ask again it will be through my lawyer.”

What offer? She is warning her.

The offer comes at 8:14....

(4) At 8.14pm Ms Monroe tweeted again, this time using Ms Hopkins’ Twitter handle: “Dear @KTHopkins, public apology +£5k to migrant rescue & I won’t sue. It’ll be cheaper for you and v. satisfying for me.” Monroe v Hopkins [2017] EWHC 433 (QB)