To think Rebekah Vardy has no chance?

[StillCoughingandLaughing]

Her case hinges on claiming someone has somehow hacked her account; be that someone she employs or someone who has somehow done it at random. Colleen Rooney very, very deliberately (and now infamously) stated ‘It’s... Rebekah Vardy’s account’.

She’s suing for libel, yet she hasn’t been personally accused. That wording was not an accident. Surely unless she can somehow prove that the fake stories were not accessed via her account, she has no case?

I think they are both pretty petty.
More so Coleen for starting it, she could have just unfriended/blocked her, cringes me a grown woman behaving like that.

Even if they settle, or even if it goes to court and Vardy wins...does anyone really believe that Vardy didn't do it? The simplest explanation is usually correct and I have to say it would take some very compelling evidence to make me think it must have been some unlikely convoluted alternative...

I expect the real winners of this will be in the legal profession.

And the tabloids.

@Flowerpot345

I think they are both pretty petty. More so Coleen for starting it, she could have just unfriended/blocked her, cringes me a grown woman behaving like that.

Plus when you follow someone on instagram it doesn't usually come with a confidentiality clause so why would you expect confidentiality?

@PrincessNutNut

Even if they settle, or even if it goes to court and Vardy wins...does anyone really believe that Vardy didn't do it? The simplest explanation is usually correct and I have to say it would take some very compelling evidence to make me think it must have been some unlikely convoluted alternative...

I think there is a strong possibility that she didn't. I mean most stories about WAGS or celebs are often attributed to a 'worried friend' or 'close source'. Some stories might come from secondary sources as the stories get passed on to others....just like with the rest of us civilians lol!

There are probably lots of opportunistic people who might sneak a peek at something or hear something and then sell it on if there's good money to be made. Rebekah definitely doesn't need the money.

'Plus when you follow someone on instagram it doesn't usually come with a confidentiality clause so why would you expect confidentiality?'

That's a really valid point too.

Yes @user1481840227, nobody has addressed the issue of motive.

Why would Vardy sell the stories? To get back at CR for some reason? To keep 'in' with the papers?

Rooney really has her work cut out for her now.

The judge had to decide what the post meant (this is a central issue in most libel cases - though funnily enough not so much in relation to the "Johnny Depp wife beater" article - not much to argue about that one!)

Rooney argued that the meaning was that there were "reasonable grounds to suspect" that Vardy had been leaking stories to the press. If the judge had agreed then Rooney would have had a fighting chance of winning, because she would be able to say that the fact the fake stories were published only to Vardy's account means that there were indeed reasonable grounds to suspect that Vardy, as the owner of the account, was the one leaking them.
However, the judge agreed with Vardy (and me! ) that the meaning of the post was that Vardy was, as a matter of fact, guilty of leaking the stories.

So that's what Rooney now has to prove to the court. Vardy just needs to muddy the water enough to undermine Rooney's case that it must have been Vardy who did it. For example (and as has been suggested), that other people had access to Vardy's account (PA, PR people, close friends or possibly a hack on the account), or that it was someone from 'team Colleen' who had been selling the stories and who was aware of Rooney's plan to try to catch someone with fake stories on her insta (again, possibly a Rooney PA or PR person, or another friend).

I don't know much about what evidence either side actually has but if I was advising Rooney I'd be telling her to get out her chequebook, and exit sharpish....

Even if they settle, or even if it goes to court and Vardy wins...does anyone really believe that Vardy didn't do it?

Exactly why I wouldn't settle if I was CR.

Why would Vardy sell the stories? To get back at CR for some reason? To keep 'in' with the papers?

Twitter at the time was alive with suggestions that RV exchanged stories with The Sun to get favourable press for her and JV.

But wasn't Vardy saying she'd been hacked back when this first broke? If she'd really only mentioned the stories to other people who leaked them, why not say that? And how likely is it that staff had access to what is supposed to be the private, personal account? If Vardy says they had, will that stand up if no staff members corroborate it?

@PrincessNutNut

But wasn't Vardy saying she'd been hacked back when this first broke? If she'd really only mentioned the stories to other people who leaked them, why not say that? And how likely is it that staff had access to what is supposed to be the private, personal account? If Vardy says they had, will that stand up if no staff members corroborate it?

Could be both - others had access to the account, and it was hacked.

Plus when you follow someone on instagram it doesn't usually come with a confidentiality clause so why would you expect confidentiality?

I think although there's no legally binding confidentiality clause, there's an expectation amongst my followers and those I follow on their private instagram accounts, that my friends and family wouldn't go showing my stuff to anyone and everyone that might be interested, for example an abusive ex (if I had one) to keep him informed of what I was up to in my daily life. Or if I was pulling a sicky from work my friends wouldn't send screenshots of a post of me spending the day getting shitfaced in a wine bar to my employers.

If you're following a celebrity on their private instagram profile, why would you go running to the papers to spill details about their private life, details that they've deliberately only chosen to share with family and friends who they presumably trust? You're not doing that for any good reason.

Because the more people who have access to an account, the less secure it becomes. Using an account for which you've found/stolen/been passed on the password by someone not its owner counts as "hacked".

Veeeeeerrrry interesting.

There is an implication that by stating the stories were leaked from her account that the stories must have come from RV. Because otherwise RV would not be saying that others had access to her account. However.. the damage has been done to RVs reputation by the actions of CR regardless of the wording. So l think the case stating that it was from her account does not mean no case to answer. CR knew the implications of what she was writing, that RV would be hunted down for it. I'm not a lawyer so not sure where that sits with libel. There is no doubt that reputational damage has been done though and l doubt that adding the word account gets CR off the hook.

I wonder if Rooney could have protected herself by being more consistent and careful with her wording so that she really had accused only the account.

@LadyTiredWinterBottom2

Veeeeeerrrry interesting.

There is an implication that by stating the stories were leaked from her account that the stories must have come from RV. Because otherwise RV would not be saying that others had access to her account. However.. the damage has been done to RVs reputation by the actions of CR regardless of the wording. So l think the case stating that it was from her account does not mean no case to answer. CR knew the implications of what she was writing, that RV would be hunted down for it. I'm not a lawyer so not sure where that sits with libel. There is no doubt that reputational damage has been done though and l doubt that adding the word account gets CR off the hook.

Yes. That's why the judge found in RV's favour today.

We've moved on now, to how Rooney will defend Vardy's claim.

If Rooney doesn't beg to settle it out of court, that is.

One of these episodes where everybody emerges looking worse, regardless of outcome.

@PrincessNutNut

I wonder if Rooney could have protected herself by being more consistent and careful with her wording so that she really had accused only the account.

As @girasol says, she could have worded it differently and avoided all this. But Coleen knew better! Coleen wanted to be Wagatha Christie!

I'm so surprised she didn't run this past the lawyers first.

Just seen @girasol post, seems we are on the same page. Imho it was a stupid thing to do and a bit shitty/bitchy/catty/trashy. No need to have handled it that way.

Lol thanks @PaperTowels l didn't know that when l posted, glad you've moved on though...!

@LadyTiredWinterBottom2

Lol thanks *@PaperTowels* l didn't know that when l posted, glad you've moved on though...!

Sorry, didn't mean to be rude, just trying to stop three pages of people wondering if it was libellous

Turns out it was

You’re getting weirdly obsessive. Seek treatment.

Plus when you follow someone on instagram it doesn't usually come with a confidentiality clause so why would you expect confidentiality?

I think you expect your mates not to sell stories on you, same way if you have a natter on the phone there’s no confidentiality clause but you don’t expect to read about it in the papers.

The truth or otherwise of the allegation was always going to be the juicy bit of this... hope they don’t settle