Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think Rebekah Vardy has no chance?

488 replies

StillCoughingandLaughing · 19/11/2020 17:39

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?

OP posts:
parrotonthesofa · 19/11/2020 20:54

Can someone explain this bit to me because I don't understand:
CR had set her insta account so inly RV's account could see it, right? So surely that means that none of her photos or videos would have had more than one like? Surely this would have seemed strange to rv as Colleen would usually have thousands of likes and you would surely notice that?

nancybotwinbloom · 19/11/2020 20:54

So for clarity

It was Colleen a personal account that the person reported to the papers about

Whose was the account that viewed the stories? Rebekahs personal or private account?

Ihatethetories · 19/11/2020 20:57

I would say RV has a very good chance. The statement from CR is defamatory of RV in that it does lower her in the estimation of a right thinking member of society and cause her to be shunned/avoided etc.
The burden of truth is on CR. How can she prove she didn’t tell a friend or family member about the fake stories she was planting? Did she tell Wayne who she thought she could trust (hahaha) but he actually told someone else, who then told another person and so on.

HotSince63 · 19/11/2020 20:57

parrotonthesofa
CR had set her insta account so inly RV's account could see it, right?

CR had set her Insta Stories so that only RV viewed them.

You can set up an Insta Story and block any individual follower from seeingit, or in this case all except one of your followers (RV), from seeing it.

ChocBeforeCock · 19/11/2020 20:58

@parrotonthesofa

Can someone explain this bit to me because I don't understand: CR had set her insta account so inly RV's account could see it, right? So surely that means that none of her photos or videos would have had more than one like? Surely this would have seemed strange to rv as Colleen would usually have thousands of likes and you would surely notice that?
No - it was her insta insta not her squares.

Basically the stories are only up for 24 hours and don’t remain on the profile. You can send a private message in response to a story (unless user has it disabled) but you can’t “like” it as such, and no one else can see your message or that you’ve replied. You can see who has viewed your own stories but you can’t see who has viewed other people’s.

Original poster
StillCoughingandLaughing · 19/11/2020 20:58

I think we should all leave them to it to be honest. We weren't there, we will never know the ins and outs of the situation. Has anyone ever thought that once again, the media are hyping us to slander two women that we don't know? Remember what happened in February when this happened to Caroline Flack? Try to refrain from commenting unless you want blood on your hands again.

So much drama. ‘Blood on your hands’? Beyond OTT.

OP posts:
ChocBeforeCock · 19/11/2020 20:59

Insta stories not insta insta! Sorry

parrotonthesofa · 19/11/2020 21:00

Ah ok so rv could not have been aware that she as the only one viewing them. Clever.

TatianaBis · 19/11/2020 21:01

@TatianaBis

I don’t know either of these women, but on basis of what has been reported CV has no chance.
CR not CV.
MrsPotatoHeadsSheeWee · 19/11/2020 21:02

The mechanics are interesting as to how /if RV got sucked in. Did she not think it was fishy that it was only ever her liking posts, adding a comment, only ever her views on the tally?

IG is so interactive that the likes/comments/views really create the buzz. CR's account must have seemed like a dust bowl with only RV in it.

MrsPotatoHeadsSheeWee · 19/11/2020 21:04

Oh, thank you for clarifying Choc!

HotSince63 · 19/11/2020 21:04

The mechanics are interesting as to how /if RV got sucked in. Did she not think it was fishy that it was only ever her liking posts, adding a comment, only ever her views on the tally?

CR posted these on her Insta Stories - so RV wouldn't have seen any likes or comments, and wouldn't know she was the only one viewing them, nor would she realise that CR would have a screenshot showing that RV is the only one that has viewed them.

wholelottaworry · 19/11/2020 21:05

Personally, if I was RV, I would have released my statement, saying:

"I have been advised that I have a strong case in libel, given that CR implied by her tweet that it was me who was leaking stories. Whilst I would like her to be forced to prove this in court, and I would like a full apology, I have realised that, given everything happening in the world today, obtaining this now is not a priority for me and I would like to donate the amount I might have had to pay in legal fees to Marcus Rashford's campaign."

Moral high ground and full rehabilitation of reputation achieved!

PaperTowels · 19/11/2020 21:07

So if the Stories disappear, all CR has as proof is screenshots. Screenshots, as she says, that only one person viewed the Stories.

But, you know, a screenshot is of a moment in time. Showing that 1 person has viewed the story doesn't mean nobody else did after, does it? I could have screenshotted this thread when it only had one reply. Proves nothing!

PaperTowels · 19/11/2020 21:08

@wholelottaworry

Personally, if I was RV, I would have released my statement, saying:

"I have been advised that I have a strong case in libel, given that CR implied by her tweet that it was me who was leaking stories. Whilst I would like her to be forced to prove this in court, and I would like a full apology, I have realised that, given everything happening in the world today, obtaining this now is not a priority for me and I would like to donate the amount I might have had to pay in legal fees to Marcus Rashford's campaign."

Moral high ground and full rehabilitation of reputation achieved!

Not really. Plenty of people wouldn't believe her, and would say that she knew she was going to lose, so backed out!
wholelottaworry · 19/11/2020 21:10

@PaperTowels

Well they might, but they still would have applauded her for making a big charity donation . And the fees will be very substantial.

HotSince63 · 19/11/2020 21:11

Your story shows with a time stamp how long its been up, and it only stays up for 24 hours.

So if she gets the screenshot at 24 hours, and it only shows RV has viewed it, then yes it proves that only RV viewed it.

Kingsley08 · 19/11/2020 21:22

Team Colleen.

Funny how there’s been zero stories on Colleen on DM’s sidebar of shame since last October when this hit social media. I can just about hear Colleen in her scouse accent shouting ‘I know she’s been selling stories about me! I’m going to get the evil cow!’

Colleen did her homework, obviously contacted her lawyers and ensured that none of her ‘friends’ will ever sell a story on her.

And her leaks were great - Appearing on strictly, travelling abroad for gender selection, flooding in her new mansion. Vardy probably thought she’d hit gold.

Vardy is so delusional that she’s continuing with this charade because she knows we know she’s a fake hungry loser.

(I’m far too invested in this saga...)

Kingsley08 · 19/11/2020 21:24

*fame hungry loser

PaperTowels · 19/11/2020 21:28

@HotSince63

Your story shows with a time stamp how long its been up, and it only stays up for 24 hours.

So if she gets the screenshot at 24 hours, and it only shows RV has viewed it, then yes it proves that only RV viewed it.

Thanks! Screenshots can be doctored, of course...
TheFairyCaravan · 19/11/2020 21:29

I’m firmly on team CR.

I wouldn’t put it past RV to do something like this. She appears to have a ruthless streak in her and craves attention. She lives locally to me. On one of her appearances on Loose Women she alleged that locals try to run her off the road because we’re all jealous of her. She’s so full of shit. She drives a 4x4 like a lot of people in the area. We’d be driving at every other vehicle if there was any truth in her statement.

HotSince63 · 19/11/2020 21:29

Of course, and I'm sure RV's forensic IT experts will be able to tell straight away that they're not Grin

PaperTowels · 19/11/2020 21:30

Funny how there’s been zero stories on Colleen on DM’s sidebar of shame since last October when this hit social media.

That still doesn't mean that Vardy did the leaking. Like she said, it could be someone who had access to her account.

I'm not saying that's the case! Just that it doesn't prove anything.

PaperTowels · 19/11/2020 21:32

@HotSince63

Of course, and I'm sure RV's forensic IT experts will be able to tell straight away that they're not Grin
I'm sure they're not, was just being a bit facetious. But showing them on one account doesn't mean CR never mentioned the stories to anyone else.

CR will have to prove that Vardy leaked, if it's been established that Vardy was libelled.

mswales · 19/11/2020 21:37

So bizarre how people got uppity with a libel lawyer coming into the discussion and giving a comprehensive breakdown of the law and how it will play out in this case! The way some of you are responding to her it's as if you think she was showing off. Seems rather oversensitive, it was a really helpful post.
@girasol could CR not lean on the honest opinion defence as well? If she's indicated she's going to rely on the truth defence then presumably she must have some proof as the honest opinion defence would also be strong surely?