Katie Hopkins

[noseall]

You cannot argue that "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 not an offer.

Correct. It is not an offer and you know it. Nor does the Judge make reference to it. Nor does the internet make reference to it. In fact you never made reference to it either, until you went down your billy bullshít rabbit hole, after more made up lies post # 303.

Now - can you please explain your posts i.e. Posts #239 to #248. You seem reluctant to address them. Either you were lying then or you are lying now. Which is it?

 

[noseall]

It will also help you with the time line. 7:20 the tweet, 8:14 the claim. (incl 5k)

Explain what you meant here as well as the posts 239, 241, 243 please?

Either you were lying then or you are lying now. Which is it?

 

[motorbiking]

Do you understand the legal concept of open offers and without prejudice offers? Do you understand when a judge can and can't take an offer in to account?

 

[noseall]

Do you understand the legal concept of open offers and without prejudice offers? Do you understand when a judge can and can't take an offer in to account?

Please explain YOUR OWN posts I've mentioned. Either you were lying then or you are lying now. Which is it?

 

[motorbiking]

Please explain YOUR OWN posts I've mentioned. Either you were lying then or you are lying now. Which is it?

You are welcome to ask new questions. But I am not going to keep going over and over old stuff with you. Its boring.

 

[noseall]

Do you understand

Do you understand what explain your own posts mean?

#239
#241
#243
#285
Please?

Either you were lying then or you are lying now. Which is it? They are your posts boyo, why are you reluctant to explain them?

 

[motorbiking]

Do you understand what explain your own posts mean?

#239
#241
#243
#285
Please?

Either you were lying then or you are lying now. Which is it? They are your posts boyo, why are you reluctant to explain them?

You are welcome to ask new questions. But I am not going to keep going over and over old stuff with you. Its boring.

 

[noseall]

Do you understand

239 is on page 16.

241 and 243 are on page 17.

285 is on page 19.

Either you were lying then or you are lying now. Which is it? Please explain? They are YOUR OWN posts.

 

[noseall]

But I am not going to keep going over and over old stuff with you.

You haven't explained the posts. You have the opportunity. Please explain them.

Either you were lying then or you are lying now. Which is it?

 

[motorbiking]

You haven't explained the posts. You have the opportunity. Please explain them.

Either you were lying then or you are lying now. Which is it?

either you are stupid or dishonest - which is it?

 

[noseall]

These posts....

Imagine it was you and I and our identities were known. Assume you defame me and I demand an apology and donation to the Reform Party of £5k. It is intended to humiliate you, as it’s well known that you cannot stand their cause. I then crow about how much fun I’m going to have owning you. Etc blah blah. It is not a genuine offer for a financial settlement. Of course I can ask you to pay me and I can suggest I will donate the money. That is entirely different. Then after your partial compliance, I then retract the offer and sue for damages.

No doubt you will suggest the above is irrelevant nonsense.

and this...

There we go, back to being dumb again. If you read 19 - 21 in the judgement. You will see the letter before action timing, the offer and when it was withdrawn.

An offer of settlement that is intended to humiliate and seek revenge, is not an offer in good faith intended to settle the complaint.

and this...

Read 19-21.

And finally this...

You are invited to read paragraph 17-21. You will see that at no point did Hopkins claim a mistake had been made until after the letter before action.


It will also help you with the time line. 7:20 the tweet, 8:14 the claim. (incl 5k)

Either you were lying then or you are lying now boyo, which is it?

 

[noseall]

either you are stupid or dishonest - which is it?

I will continue to call out your lies, until you explain the content of those posts.

Go ahead - explain the posts? What are you afraid of? They are YOUR OWN posts boyo.

 

[noseall]

You are invited to read paragraph 17-21. You will see that at no point did Hopkins claim a mistake had been made until after the letter before action.


It will also help you with the time line. 7:20 the tweet, 8:14 the claim. (incl 5k)

I'll wait.....

 

[motorbiking]

I will continue to call out your lies, until you explain the content of those posts.

Go ahead - explain the posts? What are you afraid of? They are YOUR OWN posts boyo.

I'll wait.....

You are welcome to ask new questions. But I am not going to keep going over and over old stuff with you. Its boring.

either you are stupid or dishonest - which is it?

 

[Notch7]

ut I am not going to keep going over and over old stuff with you.

you mean you wont go over stuff where youve been proven wrong