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 didn't know who Rebekah Vardy was until I saw and heard details on the news earlier. I certainly wouldn't consider her to be very 'classy', she's a nobody and an upstart, not a very nice one either.

Making comments who have 'come from nothing', like the pp I was quoting did, or someone being 'a nobody and an upstart' as you have just done. suggests that you are in no position whatsoever to judge whether someone else has any 'class', because you certainly aren't displaying much yourself.

@unmarkedbythat

Nasty, how? These women could actually be choosing to do something productive with their time. It's embarrassing and frankly pathetic.
Oh, and my comment refers to her husband too. You take a young lad off a council estate, and pay him millions. What do you think is going to happen?! He's hardly chosen to go down the role model route.

@bloodyhairy yes, let's not allow the young lads off the council estate to make something of their lives eh? Next thing you know, they are doing ghastly things like campaigning for underprivileged children to get one hot meal a day.

@bloodyhairy being a classist snob is nasty.

"This is what happens when people who ain't the brightest - and who've come from nothing - are given too much money.
They have no class."

That is classism and snobbery. I'm sure you have heard of those things and understand why they are regarded negatively?

bloodyhairy you tell em ! Know your place peasants !! Especially you on the council estates.

@bloodyhairy that you JRM?

I think the trouble for CR is that her response and rebuke looks disproportionate to the offence. It just doesn't happen that famous people openly slate another person like that, especially when their husbands represent England and are cheered on by the country, and when they are all conscious of their responsibility to be male and female role models. It was very our there, what happened.

It's obvious that that exposure of RV was going to see her sent to Coventry, and some friends of CR went on telly to say RV did this gossiping type of thing. It was obvious that RV would look like she'd broken some code of famous people to protect their ranks and not talk. RV would have been expected to lose credibility, fans and contracts. To do that makes the accuser, in this case VR, seem to be a person who is trying to pull someone down, rather than protect their own privacy.
As I say, I've no way of knowing what sort of stories had been leaking out historically, but I'm sure nobody would put on their social media a very sensitive idea about their ponderings about having gender selection. You would tell that sort of thing privately to really close friends and family. So I expect it was all mundane stuff that got leaked by somebody or other, before.

Oh they are both bitches...who on earth cares?! What a drama!

[quote bloodyhairy]@unmarkedbythat

Nasty, how? These women could actually be choosing to do something productive with their time. It's embarrassing and frankly pathetic.
Oh, and my comment refers to her husband too. You take a young lad off a council estate, and pay him millions. What do you think is going to happen?! He's hardly chosen to go down the role model route.[/quote]
You're right, only 'low-born' people would behave like that. I mean, you wouldn't catch them doing things like getting multiple women pregnant and denying paternity of their own child, would you? That's such Jeremy Kyle behaviour. Not something that a man who went to, say, Eton, and was, say, Prime Minister, would do at all.

In his judgement on Friday, Mr Justice Warby ruled that the “natural and ordinary” meaning of Mrs Rooney’s posts was that Mrs Vardy had “regularly and frequently abused her status as a trusted follower of Ms Rooney’s personal Instagram account by secretly informing The Sun newspaper of Ms Rooney’s private posts and stories”

Would it not be the case that someone who has 'trusted follower' status is regularly abusing same by giving access to their account to various unidentified others? By doing so they clearly show flagrant disregard for the privacy of the person who trusted them with access to limited personal information. Whether or not they personally disclosed this information, they obviously made it possible for the information to be spread to outside bodies against the wishes of the author.

@malificent7

Oh they are both bitches...who on earth cares?! What a drama!

Again... 😴😴😴

Clearly you do.

@MatildaMainly

In his judgement on Friday, Mr Justice Warby ruled that the “natural and ordinary” meaning of Mrs Rooney’s posts was that Mrs Vardy had “regularly and frequently abused her status as a trusted follower of Ms Rooney’s personal Instagram account by secretly informing The Sun newspaper of Ms Rooney’s private posts and stories”

Would it not be the case that someone who has 'trusted follower' status is regularly abusing same by giving access to their account to various unidentified others? By doing so they clearly show flagrant disregard for the privacy of the person who trusted them with access to limited personal information. Whether or not they personally disclosed this information, they obviously made it possible for the information to be spread to outside bodies against the wishes of the author.

She presumably didn't know the fake story posts were visible only to her account. She could argue that she discussed them with mutual acquaintances, not knowing they couldn't see the posts, and the leaks came from any one of them. Or she could claim she was hacked, or that others also used the account.

I mean, for whatever it's worth I think the simplest explanation is probably correct, but how the fuck to prove that it was Vardy and no other individual in court...

[quote bloodyhairy]@unmarkedbythat

Nasty, how? These women could actually be choosing to do something productive with their time. It's embarrassing and frankly pathetic.
Oh, and my comment refers to her husband too. You take a young lad off a council estate, and pay him millions. What do you think is going to happen?! He's hardly chosen to go down the role model route.[/quote]
Coleen is a great role model. Unlike you.

Goodness me you sound like a very unhappy person @bloodyhairy. Maybe choose something more productive to do with your time than sharing your judgement of people who you say aren't bright, come from "nothing" (or council estates - the very nerve of them becoming rich!) and have no class. Lashing out at people who have in your opinion got ideas above their station won't make you any happier

@sashagabadon

Isn’t this the same tactic Prince William used to use to see if he could trust his friends or not. Tell unique stories to people and see which ones ended up in the news of the world. Although he didn’t then take to Twitter to publically accuse anyone afterwards. Presumably just quietly removed them from his social circle which is probably what Colleen should have done.

Allegedly so, but they key thing here (as you described) is the response.

Fundamentally I think CR has misjudged the level of proof she needed to make an allegation that absolutely did impact RV's reputation.

I understand some of the comments about the obscene amounts of money involved and how it could be better spent.

However I think there's some key issues being unpicked here around the power of social media and the intent in how it's being used by people with a substantial amount of followers.

That is what interests me beyond the issues of two former wealthy friends.

The hard part is for CR to prove no one else saw it even though it only went to RVs IG story. Just my guess. It will be interesting to see how this goes from a legal point of view.

And as someone says we need to be careful with social media and what’s said or seen, or not said and seen. Also what’s implied. That’s what makes this interesting. I hope they can settle this out of court. This must be super stressful to live through. Think about it from that point of view. It’s probably the last thing they both want to face but I guess both of these ladies feel hard done by in some way, so they want justice. I don’t envy them.

@Redrosesandsunsets

The hard part is for CR to prove no one else saw it even though it only went to RVs IG story. Just my guess. It will be interesting to see how this goes from a legal point of view.

That’s why I don’t think CR has much of a chance, that will be very hard to prove.

@Redrosesandsunsets

The hard part is for CR to prove no one else saw it even though it only went to RVs IG story. Just my guess. It will be interesting to see how this goes from a legal point of view.

I see your point. CR can't prove she didn't show it to her pals to show what she had sent to RV.

Did CR say "selling" in that infamous post which sparked this court case? How would she know if the stories which came out were sold, as in money changing hands? It could be a bit of keeping in with a journalist, by RV or another and a bit of I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine. It could be a wag saying to a Sun journo " A little bird told me Coleen isn't happy with her new swimming pool (or whatever)", and trying to be matey to get positive coverage from them.

Bit of an error if money being paid for stories was the claim

Is it not appalling that these self indulgent nitwits are taking up valuable time in the overstreatched courts at a time when real victims of crime are struggling to have their cases heard?
*Completely misses the point of the thread.

She presumably didn't know the fake story posts were visible only to her account. She could argue that she discussed them with mutual acquaintances, not knowing they couldn't see the posts, and the leaks came from any one of them. Or she could claim she was hacked, or that others also used the account.

Great point actually! She could easily have said to a mutual friend of her and Colleens who she knows follows Colleen on her instagram account...did you see she's off to Mexico? or poor Colleen did you see her house flooded?

I saw this extract of the judgement on Twitter...

I wonder whether CR regrets what she did.... yet?

@Butchyrestingface

I wonder whether CR regrets what she did.... yet?

Yes I’m wondering if she will move ro settlement. She must be on dodgey ground, to argue that she was accusing the account and not her, is a really, really big deal.

Unless the sun testifies I have no idea how Colleens legal team intends to prove that just because vardy was the only person who saw the posts means she sold them. And that no one else she told did.

Personally I think colleen is a bit fucked unless the sun steps up snd says it was vardy. And Colleens defence would indicate this is not likely,...