In court tomorrow

[BitterAndOnlySlightlyTwisted]

Hayden versus Associated Newspapers.

The Judge? Go on guess. Mr Justice Julian Knowles.

Remember him? I couldn’t be happier.

This is according to contacts at the NZ fruit farm

Sorry for the repeat posts! I've asked for them to be deleted

Amazing spin there 😂

‘I lost, but I won, because people who don’t like me are mean people who should be reported to the the police’

Will the Mail win costs? Must be pretty pricey, hiring such high calibre specialists...

Anyone know the significance of Feb 2019? The articles in the case were published in September 2019...

Does anyone have a link to the judge’s ruling?

I am pleased to confirm that my views of SH are exactly the same as they were before the article was published. I'm sure I am not alone.

The articles in this case were published on 10 February 2019.

Can someone summarise for me? Wrestling a toddler round a wildlife park, cant focus!

Gosh, Hayden is putting a lot of emphasis on people not thinking any less of them because of this.

No great cause for celebration there. The bar was set about as low as it could go on that already.

Is the judgment itself available?

This judgement is re: defamation only; harassment still proceeds. I have no idea how "shortly" the "shortly" is here

I think no less of Big Steph than I did before the case.

Seems to be saying there's still a decision due on the harassment bit?

It's an interesting thought experiment. What could the press print that would make me think less of Hayden than I currently do?

One to muse on.

Am thinking hard on that one penguins. Erm erm

Nope still think just the same

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2020/540.html

To answer a question posted much earlier in the thread, counsel for Associated Newspapers was Alexandra Marzec.

www.5rb.com/member/alexandra-marzec/

Having read the litigant's view I sincerely hope Caroline Farrow is able to get the police to respond now that it's apparently clear in this judgement that doxxing, harassing and ridiculing people on line should be dealt with by the police. Since obviously law should be applied even handedly for all.

However will wait to see if the judgement read objectively says quite what is suggested here.

"There will be no appeal"

Cause Hayden knows they'd lose.
That is the only reason.

Yeah caro has had so much abuse on line. Harassing her kids pictures doxed her family doxed pics of her husbands work place

I quite love the fact that the judgment ends with all of the articles. I think that's quite usual in defamation trials but it tickles me that the last thing the reader sees is Hayden in pink smirking at the camera.

So what's the deal with the harassment part of the case? Will it go to full hearing?

Also BS says in statement that judge agreed allegations were serious enough to be reported to the police; if I've read right, what the judge actually said was that right-thinking people would think it reasonable to report something to the police if you genuinely believed it was serious harassment.

Oh yes. I forgot the February articles. How could I forget BJs commentary? 😂

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/10/police-wasting-time-arresting-twitter-transphobes-could-tackling/

The NEXT batch was September:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7415233/Mother-arrested-calling-trans-woman-man-Twitter-charged-trolling.html

The stories about Steph and Glinner were 2018 though, so I don’t really think there was much of a good reputation left in February 2019...

And then the stories about Steph and Caroline Farrow were May 2019 so by the time the Scottow September 2019 and Feb 2020 stories appeared? Absolute tatters!

And that’s without explorIng any reputations that pre date the name and gender change...

Hmm. Judicious use of the word 'alleged' there.

It doesn't in fact state quite what is being implied on Twitter.

It's interesting to see how briefly the judge dismisses the application for him to recuse himself. "Whilst the Claimant was entitled to raise the matter" tells its own story about the judge being unimpressed with such a half-arsed application.

Paragraph 43 is where the action is. It's a pretty clear dismissal by the judge.

Like others, I would be curious to know the process for proceeding with the harassment claim. (Paragraph 1, "The Claimant has sued the Defendant for libel and harassment. I am only concerned with the libel claim.")

These are the harassment bits...

At the time of the story alleged would be the right word. Not alleged any longer as Kate has been convicted.

Cont.