Katie Hopkins

[Cheesypoof]

"It's only the Internet". So 90s.

well, it is. You write something and many many folks will kick off. Someone gets their facts wrong, you should have the confidence to make your defence and move on.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Shortly after Hopkins’s original message, Monroe tweeted in response: “I have NEVER ‘scrawled on a memorial’. Brother in the RAF. Dad was a Para in the Falklands. You’re a piece of shit.”

I fear that that Monroe might get sued for liable too. By a piece of shit for being compared to Katie Hopkins.

 

[snadge]

Why? Because tweets are like patters of rain, mostly meaningless. A journalist can complain about it but should have more backbone and resilience than to whinge about their entire reputation being at stake.

I agree with you to a certain extent, twitter shite is like the 'nothing but the rain' ( BSG reference) tinkling to us norms BUT, it is increasingly being used for disinformation purposes and political smearing against people that are followed by huge amounts of people.

Although I don't care for Monroe, I do detest Hopkins though, I hope Jack gouges Hopkins a new one.

 

[existentialist]

I agree with you to a certain extent, twitter shite is like the 'nothing but the rain' ( BSG reference) tinkling to us norms BUT, it is increasingly being used for disinformation purposes and political smearing against people that are followed by huge amounts of people.

Although I don't care for Monroe, I do detest Hopkins though, I hope Jack gouges Hopkins a new one.

TWO sausages down Oxford Street!

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

TWO sausages down Oxford Street!

A Bratwurst up Bond Street!

 

[existentialist]

A Bratwurst up Bond Street!

A Curly Cumberland down Curzon Street.

 

[likesfish]

tbf Hopkins fucked up got called on it and instead of apologising she doubled down on it.
regardless of what you feel about war memorials claiming somebody was ok with vandalising one when they weren't is highly offensive so Hopkins finally gets nailed for something.

 

[Orang Utan]

Katie Hopkins is the worst by far, but this Jack Monroe is pretty objectionable too, and I don't see much merit in their case.

 

[Pickman's model]

Katie Hopkins is the worst by far, but this Jack Monroe is pretty objectionable too, and I don't see much merit in their case.

in what ways do you find jack monroe objectionable?

 

[Wookey]

Don't get that at all. From what I read the other day (but can't find link just now ), JM's got a pretty damned strong case? Please explain ...

Libel actions are nearly always a bad idea... The way the law works in the UK makes it an expensive and very unpredictable way to wash your linen in public. And as Jack herself admits, she's been through 18 months of Hell... For what? For a misdirected comment from a certified loon that was deleted in a couple of hours? Really?? She has better and more important things to work on... We all do.

So from a legal as well as spiritual viewpoint she should have walked on by, rather than turning a throw-away digital quip aimed at someone else, into front page news. Jack did that, not Katie Hopkins!

 

[Pickman's model]

in what ways do you find jack monroe objectionable?

Orang Utan can you answer the question?

 

[William of Walworth]

Thanks for that post Wookey -- it got me rethinking about this case I must say.

 

[Dan U]

Hopkins lost. 24k damages.

 

[teqniq]

 

[Dan U]

Looks like costs still being discussed according to twitter.

 

[DaveCinzano]

Food writer wins Katie Hopkins libel battle - BBC News

 

[killer b]

Looks like costs still being discussed according to twitter.

no, her barrister is just rubbing salt into the wound, by announcing Monroe offered to take 5 grand on the day of the tweet.

 

[JimW]

Hopkins lost. 24k damages.

It's all a conspiracy to fabricate an illusion of "British justice"

 

[killer b]

(which was refused by Hopkins)

 

[Dan U]

no, her barrister is just rubbing salt into the wound, by announcing Monroe offered to take 5 grand on the day of the tweet.

Take a look at @Law_and_policy's Tweet:

David Green has led me to believe otherwise but could be me not understanding the ins and outs of all this.

 

[killer b]

oh sorry - thought you meant the award...

 

[DaveCinzano]

Twenty-four grand isn't a bad result for two insulting tweets

 

[8den]

The Judgement is quite hilarious, some samples

" Ms Hopkins has sometimes been described in the print media as “rentagob”

"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) "

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-con...onroe-v-hopkins-2017-ewhc-433-qb-20170310.pdf

 

[DotCommunist]

Twenty-four grand isn't a bad result for two insulting tweets

at some point twitter chat became srs bssnss but I can't call where that line is. early oo's?

 

[sim667]

no, her barrister is just rubbing salt into the wound, by announcing Monroe offered to take 5 grand on the day of the tweet.

She didn't even offer to take it, she said as a charity donation.

 

[DaveCinzano]

at some point twitter chat became srs bssnss but I can't call where that line is. early oo's?

Twitter was only launched in 2006.

 

[weltweit]

How do I get Hopkins to libel me then? how?

 

[killer b]

She's been awarded £107,000 costs - which isn't the full amount. That's why Hopkins and her ilk can libel all they like most of the time - most people can't afford to risk that kind of money.

 

[killer b]

(in fact, if it's only 60% of the costs as David Allen Green suggested, she's still out of pocket by the best part of 50 grand)

 

[gosub]

Food writer wins Katie Hopkins libel battle - BBC News

She'll have to do more media 'work' to pay for it.