Is it possible that Britain’s populist polemicist Katie Hopkins may be right? Perhaps, just on this one thing: the outcome of the Jack Monroe libel trial. She says the High Court judge who found against her for her inaccurate and rude tweets against Monroe was wrong and she intends to appeal.
Monroe was awarded £24,000 in damages in the High Court in a row over a tweet implying the food writer and activist approved of defacing a war memorial during an anti-austerity demonstration in Whitehall followed by one suggesting that, even if she didn’t approve, she was a pretty awful person (“social anthrax” was the term used). Hopkins had simply confused Monroe with left-wing polemicist Laurie Penny.
In the case Mr Justice Warby noted that:
“Libel consists of the publication by the defendant to one or more third parties of a statement about the claimant which has a tendency to defame the claimant, and causes…
View original post 2,976 more words