Katie Hopkins sued

stockhausen

stockhausen

stockhausen

Capodecina
Soldato
Joined
30 Jul 2006
Posts
12,130
Jack Monroe is suing Katie Hopkins for £50,000 after the Mail Online columnist accused her of sympathising with the vandalisation of a war memorial and then admitted that she had confused the food blogger with another writer.

Monroe on Monday confirmed issuing proceedings after the controversial columnist accused the blogger of supporting the vandalism of a second world war memorial.

The row, reported on Monday in the Press Gazette, dates back to last May when Twitter erupted after a memorial was daubed. Hopkins asked Monroe: “Scrawled on any memorials lately? Vandalised the memory of those who fought for your freedom? Grandma got any more medals?”

The blogger denied the accusation on Twitter.

I have NEVER 'scrawled on a memorial'. Brother in the RAF. Dad was a Para in the Falklands. You're a piece of ****.
Click to expand...

I guess that Ms. Monroe should be very grateful that faeces cannot resort to the law ;)
 
Must admit, it cheered me up when I saw that KH had lost and had to fork out 26k. Couldn't happen to a nicer piggy.

EDIT. £300k in legal fees too. lmao. Sweet.
 
Still not sure how it cost £300k in legal fees*! Especially when the award was only £26k.

The only people that really won were the lawyers.

*weren't both no win no fee lawyers, so the £300k is only for one side and the court?
 
Amp34 said:
Still not sure how it cost £300k in legal fees*! Especially when the award was only £26k.

The only people that really won were the lawyers.

*weren't both no win no fee lawyers, so the £300k is only for one side and the court?
Click to expand...
The lawyers always win.
 
Amp34 said:
*weren't both no win no fee lawyers, so the £300k is only for one side and the court?
Click to expand...

Why on earth would you think a no win no fee Lawyer would represent A daily Mail columnist ?

As for the costs each sides lawyers are only a part of the costs.
 
Couldn't have happened to a nastier ......

Apparently, earlier today, she tweeted a picture of herself as the virgin mary saying she was the jesus of the outspoken.

****.
 
Every time I hear or read her name I'm (after I've been violently sick) reminded of her assertion that geography child names like Brooklyn and London (two examples she cited) are "chavvy" and then tried to blag it when confronted about her own daughter's name of India.

Her and Louise Mensch should get together and brick themselves up in a house in Siberia; which is then beset by rabid, brick breaking badgers.
 
Domi said:
Why on earth would you think a no win no fee Lawyer would represent A daily Mail columnist ?

As for the costs each sides lawyers are only a part of the costs.
Click to expand...


Monroe was not awarded full costs, but, since both legal teams were on a no-win-no-fee basis, Monroe will not have to pay.
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...wins-twitter-libel-case-against-katie-hopkins

I'd assume that means Hopkins team won't get paid, and Monroes team will be paid for by Hopkins. Either court costs are significant or Monroes team have cost a huge amount!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom