Katie Hopkins sued

I think some silliness is now in the offing, someone set up a crowdfunding page to pay for Katie's legal fees
Then in the smaller print said the money would go to food aid, or some such cause.

Given the original issue of wrong naming people, and lies over social media, I don't think this is the smartest move, obtaining money by deception.
 
Amp34 said:
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!
Click to expand...

I cannot really understand why a law firm would take the case as no win no fee but my understanding in this situation is if you lose you "might" have to pay some or all of the other sides costs.

The £24000 is KH liability her law firm pays its own costs and almost certainly advised her to take out insurance in case of a loss and that will pay Monroes team, court costs are on top of that and again can be charged to either or both sides and again insurance will probably pick that up.

The long and short of it is that it is very expensive to take something like this to court.
 
Was so confused when I saw this the other day with a picture of a woman and 'Jack Monroe' underneath - a woman called Jack, yea ok.
 
Sure, trolls are gonna troll, but where do you draw the line? If I call somebody on this forum an idiot (i.e. a direct attack) then surely that's a matter for the Dons, not the police?

Back in early Web 1.0, I was sent multiple death threats by email and the perpetrator already knew some basic info about me. One other person was at he receiving end of the death threats too. I reported it to the university (as that was where it happened) but no outcome in the end.

Then here, someone mixed up two people regarding the vandalisation of a grave then has to pay £26k because she got the wrong person?

So in summary:

Death threat on the internet = no punishment
Mis-telling on the internet = £26k fine

....riiiiiiiiight :rolleyes:
 
Pawnless Endgame said:
Sure, trolls are gonna troll, but where do you draw the line? If I call somebody on this forum an idiot (i.e. a direct attack) then surely that's a matter for the Dons, not the police?

Back in early Web 1.0, I was sent multiple death threats by email and the perpetrator already knew some basic info about me. One other person was at he receiving end of the death threats too. I reported it to the university (as that was where it happened) but no outcome in the end.

Then here, someone mixed up two people regarding the vandalisation of a grave then has to pay £26k because she got the wrong person?

So in summary:

Death threat on the internet = no punishment
Mis-telling on the internet = £26k fine
Click to expand...

The difference is you didn't bother to get legal with it also death threats would be primarily a police issue not a libel wrangle with a money penalty in it.

If you are an identifiable person and you broadcast factually incorrect information about someone with negative implications they can sue you for damaging their personal character and business.

You could try and make a claim for distress from death threats if you really wanted.

In all cases its a waste of time if the person you're trying to sue is an actual nobody and will never have the money to pay you.

In this case the person is a known attention selling troll and has money.

You can also see the big sum is not even the amount being sued for which is less than 1/10 of the costs of the case which also have to be paid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom