katie hopkins - 150k fine

Katie Hopkins’ legal bills are to top £300,000 after she lost a High Court battle to poverty campaigner and food blogger Jack Monroe, The Independent understands.

The judgement ordered Hopkins pay Monroe compensation of £24,000 for defamatory comments made on Twitter in May 2015.

But Monroe’s lawyers confirmed to The Independent that Hopkins will also pick up the bill for legal costs in excess of £300,000.

KT in the main merely says what most are thinking but are afraid to say.
Long may she continue exposing what the media dodge. Should be made a Dame.

The West highland terrier arrives in his union jack coat

Says Jeremys wee lapdog. Woof Woof.


wildmanfromborneo
Katie Hopkins is an English patriot and fearless in defence of her country,I hope she gets some financial backing here.

Every country needs at least one Katie to tell it like it is.

wrongly blaming innocent folk for the crimes of others

carry on cashpoint katie

Or in Katie's case telling it like it isn't.

Apparently, pride is the greatest sin of all! She'd rather waste hundreds of thousands of pounds than lose her pride (ie. apologise).

cooperman
Or in Katie's case telling it like it isn't

How many statements has Katie made?
How many has she been taken to court for?
I think the odds favour her.

Great news.

If only it could it ruin her both financially & mentally.



Btw aka, going to court can be an expensive business as poor old Katie can testify.

She won't be doing that againit's all fakery as well what will she do now eh!!Fcuk all..

Wesdag/thegiggilo You do know that the Mail is picking up the tab.
Won't cost Katie a penny. Still laughing?

Yes!!

Yes!!

Katie telling it like it is. enjoy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UDyyxRvoiU

How often has Katie upset the lefties?
Hundreds of times and high hundreds at that.
How often have they got their own back?
Once for certain.
I hereby declare Katie the winner by a country mile.

So like she tweeted to the wrong name by accident, then deleted it, and she gets done for the price of a house?

The world has gone mad.

(Awaits the world suing for emotional distress)

Yep, still laughing Aka.

The real criminals in this case are the legal profession.
How can they justify those fees.

They seem to have formed an alliance with the judiciary.
Any time the State is being sued they pile on the expenses with the tacit approval of the judiciary.

We need a lot more in the public domain speaking out about all manner of issues.

I love how the defenders of free speech want to stop free speech.

by having posts removed ?

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/katie-hopkins-see-myself-jesus-outspoken-015300526...

There have always been limits to free speech, libel being one of them.

Hth.

The disgrace is how these trials cost so much. Its nothing more than theft really.

One of the reasons why her hate filled diatribes haven't been challenged as often as they should.

^ spot on

I think bringing the issues into the lime light, which very few outlets seem to wish because of offending someone or losing votes, is to be applauded.

No problem with that so long as you don't tell lies about people.

That's libel.

Almost nobody on tv media wants to discuss certain issues and certain cults and how they behave.

Not sure what that has to do with this particular case where Hopkins accused this woman of defacing a war memorial.

doesnt stop them ranting about it

Quick check with the good people posting, on behalf of Akabula.
Still laughing?

In a society and tv media which is trying to shut down the discussion I am glad someone is prepared to speak out.

so are the libel lawyers

I am quite happy to see issues raised for debate

not allowed to bet - with respect, you seem to have missed the main point of this thread. The issue here is not about raising issues for debate, or even shutting down discussion. It is about telling lies about people, which you cannot do under current law. What bit of this did you not understand.

WELL yes you are right, but I don't think one fk up should reflect on someone who raises issues everybody is scared to raise.
all the best
One **** up is used to flog her and therefore make the issues she raises as irrelevent.
The deabate MUST continue.

oh deare i kannott smell werds animoore

met her

v sexy lady

spec with whip in her hand and jodhpurs

Wonder if any chit chat idiots contributed to this

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/spoof-fundraising-page-katie-hopkins-002700680.html

Why would the Daily Fail pay for her expenses/fines in this matter? This case has nothing to do with this paper has it? It's her own personal tweetings that have got her into trouble I thought - nothing to do with the paper.

possibly contracted to them to keep their readers happy whilst
not directly publishing her rantings as part of their agenda

Can't say I like the girl but the fine seems a dangerous step to suppressing comment,free speech is a precious aspect and the rush to take offence can affect both left and right wings of the spectrum,only the lawyers will benefit.

The person libelled in this case was prepared to accept an apology plus a £5k donation to charity from Hopkins. Ms Hopkins refused this offer and chose to go to trial, which I'm sure the judge took into account when determining her fine and costs.

treetop - free speech does not allow you to tell lies about individuals.

That's called libel.

Hth.

24 k for libel doesnt seem high tenpins

had the victim been more famous i'm sure damages would be higher

freedom of speech doesnt include right to falsely accuse folk with no comeback

treetop not tenpins , easy mistake to make !

Is what you may think in the back of your mind always the best thing to do?
I think not, but many have fallen for this false premise when the people
saying it are not politicians or influential, except through the media they
prosper in who see them as a meal ticket.It's a topsy turvy World.

I can note the points made but before long we will be scared to say anything,no banter in football crowds,pubs with snitches reporting anything untoward,a dangerous step when we let the compensation lawyers control us.

you can still banter, you can speak the truth

if you make an error you recognise .....apologise


and anonymous forums are different to ones where people go by their real names and
have real reputations that can be damaged by other real people


libel law, and slander has existed for years, certainly not a new thing

There never used to be a large segment of the country looking to be offended though. As for banter, it is becoming increasingly sterile in many places and will vanish eventually. Was there banter in fictional Stepford? I can't remember tbh

banter is usually between two people or groups and not abuse by one on another

calling it banter afterwards is a device used by some




i was surprised at the millwall spurs stuff yesterday, it didnt seem racist, just an attempt at humour
to put off a player. still, its being investigated, and perhaps we have moved a step closer to
a banterless society

there will be more and more cult to be offended as each year goes by
I hope this helps

It's all nonsense mistakenly assuming that people of different countries and backgrounds can't find the common ground to get on together.

You had better tell the  chancers, fraudsters, shoplifters, thieves, pickpockets, drunk and violent visitors we have in a town near me. Our friends, who are all the same as us, having a field day just shrugging their shoulders claiming they don't understand or don't speak the language.

Of course this statement is just made to stir up trouble.  But tell the locals this and Bleeding would get a flea in his ear.  But then bleeding has his eu backed agenda to follow.

is that during their away days whilst winning european cups ?

chancers, fraudsters, shoplifters, thieves, pickpockets, drunks not be confused with U.K. citizens who follow the same description .

Of course - there would be none of that if we hadn't let them in.  A lot less crime, vehicle accidents and fraud. But hey ho let's embrace the open door policy and let more in to turn us over.

So you are saying crime would virtually cease if refugees weren't allowed in?

it would breeding, but there would be nobody here !

Don't be obtuse

.  where did I say that?

I think you twisters of words should learn to read and understand instead of leaping on your usual eu sponsored agenda.

you cant brainwash us to your crusade mobo

Of course - there would be none of that if we hadn't let them in
must have misread it

A LOT LESS CRIME - keep them out and there are less problems but instead we are importing traffickers and known criminals into this country. Others are trying to take a free ride or even abuse the generosity of people here.

not allowed to bet 13 Mar 17 18:20 
Of course - there would be none of that if we hadn't let them in.  A lot less crime, vehicle accidents and fraud. But hey ho let's embrace the open door policy and let more in to turn us over.

you don't read do you

pokermonster would call that an accurate quote

If you allow free movement of criminals from foreign countries you will get more crime.
I hope this helps.

Or do you think that convicted rapists, murderers, scrap metal gangs, sex traffickers etc are coming here to reform??

What's happened to poor old Katie in all this?

I hope her supporters have been donating in her time of need, poor dear.

http://southendnewsnetwork.com/news/our-fundraising-appeal-for-katie-hopkins-legal-fee****-14k-in-two-days/

Please give generously.

You are making statements without proof ,show me any that proves beyond reasonable doubt that
immigrants or refugees commit more crime as a percentage of population than Native Brits?

As I said - if you let more in there will be more crime.  I couldn't be more clear than that.  I haven't said ANYTHING about percentages/population. Importing known criminals as well just adds to the growth of crime.
They rub their hands at the thought of being allowed into the UK to cruise the motorways doing their scrap theft.  There are gangs from poland and bulgaria helping themselves, getting arrested then leave the country only to come back again later.

I hope this helps.

we exported lots of our criminals, i hope brexit doesnt cause them to return

From 1997 ...
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/25718/Britain-shoplifting-capital-of-Europe

Sorry meant 2007 heres one from 2005..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1499956/Britons-are-Europes-most-prolific-shoplifters.html

1997   I think we are talking more up to date
the new boys and girls from your beloved eu which your masters have sent here are taking over
https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/the-most-defrauded-atm-in-london-394

integration in action ?

Jack Monroe "fell apart as a person" after defamatory tweets sent by Mail Online columnist Katie Hopkins, the food blogger has told the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme.

FFS

As she was receiving this abuse, Ms Monroe had offered to drop the case in exchange for a charitable donation: “Dear @KTHopkins, public apology + £5K to migrant rescue and I won’t sue. It’ll be cheaper for you and v satisfying for me."


Who advised KH to not accept this initial offer in the first place? Surely KH should have cashed out before the money became a silly amount.

Jack Monroe "fell apart as a person" after defamatory tweets sent by Mail Online columnist Katie Hopkins, the food blogger has told the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme.
Monroe successfully sued Hopkins over two tweets published in 2015, asking if Monroe had "scrawled on any [war] memorials recently".
This had suggested Monroe had either vandalised a war memorial or "condoned or approved" of it, the blogger said.
Hopkins told the BBC: "No comment."
Monroe told the programme Hopkins's tweets had left the blogger "absolutely horrified".
"My brother is an officer in RAF, my dad was a paratrooper in the Falklands," Monroe said.
"As part of the evidence [from the trial], I've got six A4 ring-binders of tweets I received - somebody telling me I should be shot in the head, put in a wheelchair - all sorts of abuse.
"It wasn't just in the aftermath in May [2015].
"It was ongoing, every time it came up.
"The stress was so awful, I ended up leaving my partner.
"My relationship broke down, I was about to get married. I fell apart as a person.
"Online abuse permeates into every aspect of everyday life.
"It was a life-changing series of events.
"I had a complete breakdown."
Monroe said that having won £24,000 damages, plus legal costs, in a libel action earlier this month, "I've got space to breathe and do my actual work".
"It's been almost two years of weekly legal meetings," Monroe said. "So it's a huge weight lifted.
"I hope it teaches people to be a bit nicer to each other."

The case arose after some Twitter users highlighted an anti-Conservative profanity daubed on a memorial to the women of World War Two during an anti-austerity demonstration.
In May 2015, Hopkins tweeted: "@MsJackMonroe scrawled on any memorials recently? Vandalised the memory of those who fought for your freedom. Grandma got any more medals?"
The judge presiding over the case, Mr Justice Warby, ruled that the tweet "meant that Ms Monroe condoned and approved of scrawling on war memorials, vandalising monuments commemorating those who fought for her freedom".
He found that a second tweet from Hopkins "meant that Ms Monroe condoned and approved of the fact that in the course of an anti-government protest there had been vandalisation by obscene graffiti of the women's war memorial in Whitehall, a monument to those who fought for her freedom".
The judge added: "These are meanings with a defamatory tendency, which were published to thousands."
'Make a donation'
Monroe said Hopkins had initially been asked to delete her tweet, but "she didn't respond to me being nice".
"She blocked me immediately instead of responding," Monroe said.
"So then I said, 'Make a donation and it goes away.'
"And she didn't respond to that. In the months that followed, I made several offers to her to make an apology [without receiving one]."
Monroe added: "I've got a lot of compassion for her actually.
"It can't be nice for the whole world to be waiting for your downfall.
"I said to my followers on Friday, 'Don't be abusive, don't be unkind to her.' It doesn't make anyone feel good.
"I don't support her in what she does, but no-one will get anywhere by name-calling."


bbc.co.uk

just flicked over a page of a newspaper and there is another foreign murderer.  Open doors and let more in.

WTF has that to do with this thread about Hopkins?

Nothing. But then again he appears to be a dunce.

The family of Alice Gross now what it is like to have everything fall apart.

How she felt is down to her. It's all relative.

But the bottom line is, she was libelled.

the dunce says 'read earlier posts and discussions'

particularly Bleeding and osmond

hope this helps

ha ha mobo

anything to post a bit more bigotry

Jack Monroe has never came across as the utra sensitive type,particularly when she has been on demos and TV. I suspect a lot of that 'falling apart' was for the benefit of the legal eagle's case against Hopkins.

Jack Monroe has never came across as the utra sensitive type,particularly when she has been on demos and TV. I suspect a lot of that 'falling apart' was for the benefit of the legal eagle's case against Hopkins.

MATRON!!! 

yes I am sure the evil hopkins has irretrievably damaged her psychologically - absolutely disgusting the poor shy retiring girl   awwwwwwwww!!!

Wow, the pro-Hopkins seethe continues.



The woman is a liar as this case has shown.

Get over it.

Hopkins - a dreadful specimen of a human being!

According to Katie, everyone in London is cowering in fear.


https://uk.yahoo.com/news/jk-rowling-slams-katie-hopkins-amid-twitter-rant-a...

https://youtu.be/bxd3hnpLFNI

Anyone care to disagree with her?

How CAN you disagree with Katie..what she says is the truth as is the magnificent article by Richard littlejohn in today's Mail.

Most of any opposition to the agenda will not get on tv I can assure you. They have it tied up tight.