Katie Hopkins

[noseall]

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

MBK is a dishonest spineless liar. His own posts have called him out. Of course he won't explain them, especially this really embarrassing one...

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)

He changed tack when I pressed with his relentless bullshít i.e....

The demand for an apology was not sincere.

Lies.

Monroe’s offer was not sincere and rapidly withdrawn

More lies.

He changed tack in post #303 when he made up this whopper (bold, highlighted, enlarged)....

WRONG

you've literally just made up your own version. Here is the correct version again:

(1) At 7.20pm Ms Hopkins posted the first tweet of which Ms Monroe complains (“The First Tweet”). It was in these words: “@MsJackMonroe scrawled on any memorials recently? Vandalised the memory of those who fought for your freedom. Grandma got any more medals?”
(2) At 7.33pm Ms Monroe tweeted in these terms: “I have NEVER ‘scrawled on a memorial’. Brother in the RAF. Dad was a Para in the Falklands. You’re a piece of s**t.” (With a screenshot to the First Tweet)
(3) 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.” (With a link to the First Tweet)
(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.”
(6) At 9.47pm Ms Hopkins posted the second tweet of which Ms Monroe complains (“the Second Tweet”). It was in these terms:“Can someone explain to me - in 10 words or less - the difference between irritant @PennyRed and social anthrax @jack Monroe.”
(7) At some point that evening, I infer about this time, Ms Hopkins blocked Ms Monroe. That prevented Ms Monroe from communicating with her via Twitter.
(8) Later on 18 May 2015 the Claimant published the following on Twitter: “BA_DA_BOOM! It lies! It smears! It’s wrong! It panics! It blocks! It’s @KTHopkins everyone!” (With six pictures of a chicken)
(9) At 22:30 on 18 May 2015 the Claimant published the following on Twitter: “Gin o clock. Cheers. God isn’t it good sweet justice when a poisonous bully gets shown up for what it is and runs runs runs away.”

This is from the judgement not your made up version.

Your version corrected below:

Tweet 1: Hopkins to Monroe
Tweet 2: Monroe reply to Hopkins saying no she had not abd would not deface memorials
Tweet 2.1: Monroe reply to Hopkins demanding an apology
"Tweet 4": Monroe to Hopkins asking for money to charity.
"Tweet 3": Hopkins to Monroe: another poisonous tweet

It makes a difference.

...and then seemed to be stuck in an endless cycle of lies, whilst at the same time conveniently forgetting posts # 239, 241, 243, 285.

I despise lies and liars.

 

[motorbiking]

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

I've answered his questions dozens of times, he doesn't like the answer. I can't help him with that.

You still wont accept that the whole defamation came about because Hopkins mistook Monroe for someone else. Something that pete01 said in the first half dozen pages.

It's you and nosenout looking daft as usual. Sorry about that. sorry as in, not sorry.

 

[noseall]

I've answered his questions dozens of times, he doesn't like the answer. I can't help him with that.

Nonsense. You haven't addressed the posts I mentioned. Either you were lying then or you are lying now. Your own posts contradict your ridiculous version of the truth.

Please explain 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 (my favourite)...

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?

 

[motorbiking]

I told you to read the judgement, I explained with an example what a bad faith offer looked like. I corrected Notch's incorrect summary of the order of things. here it is again. its incorrect

I dont think Monroe did make any demand at the beginning

she asked for the tweet to be deleted or she'd sue

all Hopkins needed to have done was apologise properly

apparently not.

Monroe only escalated after Hopkins effectively doubled down, with her non apology which was the excuse of mistaken identity

Hopkins deleted the post as requested. Of course she then escalated with her cretinous reference to social anthrax.

The fact remains that you refuse to accept it was mistaken identity - it was and you refuse to accept Monroe changed her offer after 38 mins - she did.

You also don't understand why the judge cannot refer to any of the tweets as open offers - they were all without the benefit of legal advice.

 

[noseall]

I told you to read the judgement,

I have. You made reference to it in the posts below. What could be easier than explaining your own posts, i.e...
#239
#241
#243
#285

Were you lying in those posts or are you lying now? For example....

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)

Explain this post please? And were you lying then or are you lying now?

 

[Lirefighter]

I told you to read the judgement, I explained with an example what a bad faith offer looked like. I corrected Notch's incorrect summary of the order of things. here it is again. its incorrect


she asked for the tweet to be deleted or she'd sue

apparently not.

Hopkins deleted the post as requested. Of course she then escalated with her cretinous reference to social anthrax.

The fact remains that you refuse to accept it was mistaken identity - it was and you refuse to accept Monroe changed her offer after 38 mins - she did.

You also don't understand why the judge cannot refer to any of the tweets as open offers - they were all without the benefit of legal advice.

You deserve a medal mate.
I don't know how you do it.

 

[noseall]

I don't know how you do it.

Olympic lying? Gold medal every time for MBK. He’s sure squirming now. Too afraid to explain his own posts. How sad is that.

 

[Lirefighter]

Olympic lying? Gold medal every time for MBK. He’s sure squirming now. Too afraid to explain his own posts. How sad is that.

Most people would have put you on ignore at about page 2.
Not @motorbiking he's made of sterner stuff.
His sacrifice enduring the nosenowt roundabout for so long aught to be commended.
We all applaud his dedication to keeping you from bothering the rest of us.
Thank you.

 

[noseall]

Most people would have put you on ignore at about page 2.
Not @motorbiking he's made of sterner stuff.
His sacrifice enduring the nosenowt roundabout for so long aught to be commended.
We all applaud his dedication to keeping you from bothering the rest of us.
Thank you.

I’m glad you and others are witness to his bullshìt. I don’t need a medal though. Just for MBK to explain his own posts. What could be simpler?
Have a guess why the spineless lying scumbag is reluctant….

 

[motorbiking]

Most people would have put you on ignore at about page 2.
Not @motorbiking he's made of sterner stuff.
His sacrifice enduring the nosenowt roundabout for so long aught to be commended.
We all applaud his dedication to keeping you from bothering the rest of us.
Thank you.
View attachment 380328

I think he’s tapping me along. Nobody can be that stupid to need it explaining so many times. Unfortunately, when you show Nosenout’s stupidity up, he starts accusing you of lying.

Anything that explains why he was wrong is “irrelevant waffle” and anything he doesn’t understand is “lies”.

I do wonder how he functions in life.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

Most people would have put you on ignore at about page 2.
Not @motorbiking he's made of sterner stuff.

Refusal to admit to being wrong is not strength nor courage, it's a refusal to accept that one might be wrong, and is afraid to admit to being wrong in case one loses what credibility one thinks they have.
Perhaps it's summarised as "low esteem of oneself".

 

[noseall]

I think he’s tapping me along.

Explain your posts, lying scumbag.
He won't, he can't.

 

[motorbiking]

everyone else got it apart from dumb and dumber and his new (old) fwiend.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

everyone else got it apart from dumb and dumber and his new (old) fwiend.

You've hopped, skipped and jumped around trying to conflate and confuse the issue.
For instance, your comment about mistaken identity was nonsense and irrelevant to the issue.

You still wont accept that the whole defamation came about because Hopkins mistook Monroe for someone else.

The claim to 'mistaken identity' was simply a ruse by Hopkins to cover her faux pas.
It had no relevance to the case and the judgement/judgment.

If I commit a faux pas, I apologise. Simple.

 

[MNW67]

The claim to 'mistaken identity' was simply a ruse by Hopkins to cover her faux pas.

What do you mean by her faux pas?