Play Brightcove video
A judge ruled in Coleen Rooney’s favor and said it was “likely” that Rebekah Vardy knew about and approved the passing of information, Martha Fairlie reports.
Rebekah Vardy has lost ‘Wagatha Christie’s’ High Court defamation battle against Coleen Rooney over a viral social media post.
In a viral social media post in October 2019, Ms Rooney, 36, said she had carried out a “needle operation” and accused Ms Vardy, 40, of leaking “false stories” about his private life in the press.
The total legal costs of the case are believed to be in the region of £3m, most of which will now be borne by Ms Vardy. In addition to the legal defeat, experts believe that the revelations made during the trial will have irreparably damaged his reputation.
Ms Rooney said in a statement that she was “delighted” that the verdict was in her favor but that she “never believed” the case should have gone to court “at the cost of so much at a time of difficulty for so many people when the money could have been.” Invest much better in helping others.”
The wife of former England star Wayne Rooney publicly claimed that Ms Vardy’s account was the source behind three fake stories she had posted on her private Instagram account. Ms Rooney earned the nickname “Wagatha Christie” thanks to her social media research.
Responding to the sentence, Ms Vardy said she was “extremely saddened and disappointed by the decision” as it was not what she “had expected, nor did I believe was fair”.
“I brought this action to vindicate my reputation and I am devastated by the judge’s finding,” he added.
In her ruling, Judge Steyn said it was “likely” that Ms Vardy’s agent at the time, Caroline Watt, “undertook the direct act” of passing the information to The Sun.
He said Ms Vardy chose not to call Ms Watt to testify in part because she knew her evidence would “be proven not to be true”.
Judge Steyn added: “However, the evidence … clearly shows, in my view, that Ms Vardy knew and condoned this behaviour, actively participating in it by targeting Ms Watt on the private Instagram account, sending their screenshots of Ms Rooney’s posts, drawing attention to matters of potential interest to the press and answering additional queries raised by the press through Ms Watt.
The judge added: “In my judgment, the conclusions I have reached about the extent to which the claimant engaged in disclosing to The Sun information to which she only had access as an authorized follower of an account Instagram that she knew, and Ms. Rooney repeatedly claimed, was private, is enough to show that the single meaning is substantially true.”
Coleen Rooney said she spent five months trying to find out who was sharing information about herCredit: Yui Mok/PA
Mrs Vardy, who is married to Leicester City striker Jamie Vardy, denied leaking the stories and sued her fellow footballer’s wife for defamation, while Mrs Rooney defended the claim on the grounds that the his post was “substantially true”.
The fake stories Ms Rooney planted on her Instagram during the sting operation featured her traveling to Mexico for a “gender selection” procedure, her plans to return to television and the flooded basement at her home .
Posting on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook, she wrote: “I have saved and screenshotted all the original stories which clearly show that only one person has seen them. “It’s ………. Rebekah Vardy’s account.
Over seven days in court 13 of the Royal Courts of Justice, the wives of the two footballers each gave evidence as revelations in the case made daily headlines in the British press.
The two women each gave evidence during the trial, as did Mr Rooney, also 36, who played for Everton and Manchester United as well as England.
Referring to Ms Rooney’s viral post of ‘revelation’ at the end of the trial, her barrister David Sherborne told the court: ‘It’s what she believed at the time… and it’s what she believes even more now that we have reached the end of the case.”
Sherborne argued that Ms Vardy had a “regular and established practice” of leaking information about those she knew, through Ms Watt, to The Sun newspaper.
He said there were, in text message exchanges between Ms Vardy and Ms Watt, examples of the pair discussing the leaking of other people’s private information.
After the verdict, Mrs Rooney said: “It was not a case I ever sought or wanted. I never believed it should have gone to court at such expense at a time of difficulty for so many people when money could to have spent much better to help others.
“Both before and after my social media posts in October 2019, I did everything I could to avoid the need for such a lengthy and public court case. All my attempts to do so were rebuffed by Mrs. (Rebekah) Vardy.
“This left me with no alternative but to press ahead with the case to defend myself and end the repeated leaking of my private information to The Sun.
“These leaks of my private Instagram account started in 2017. They continued for almost two years, invading my privacy and that of my family. While I bear no ill will towards Mrs Vardy, today’s judgment makes it clear that I was right in what I said in my posts of October 2019.”
Ms Vardy issued her own statement after the verdict, in which she said: “I am very saddened and disappointed by the decision the judge has made. It is not the result I expected, nor did I believe it was fair. I brought this action to vindicate my reputation and I am devastated by the judge’s finding.
“The judge accepted that Coleen’s Post publication was not in the ‘public interest’ and also rejected her claim that I was the ‘secret Wag’. But as for the rest of her judgment, she got it wrong and this is something that I “As I explained in my evidence, I, my family and even my unborn baby, were subjected to disgusting messages and vile abuse after Coleen’s Post and these have continued until and all during the trial. Please people who have been mistreating me and my family can stop now. The case is over. “I want to thank everyone who has supported me.”
Rebekah Vardy leaving the Royal Courts of Justice Credit: Victoria Jones/PA
Brand experts told ITV News that the Wagatha Christie trial had been a PR disaster for Ms Vardy and had seriously damaged her reputation.
The case has drawn a series of incidents that paint Ms Vardy, 40, in a “very bad light”, said branding expert Nick Ede, as his 2004 interview with the News of The World, in which ridiculed singer Peter Andre’s genitals.
Listen to our entertainment podcast, Unscripted