Rebekah Vardy subjected to ‘massive public abuse and ridicule’, trial

Rebekah Vardy’s lawyer Hugh Tomlinson QC told the Supreme Court she had suffered ‘very serious damage to her reputation’ as a result of Coleen Rooney’s ‘Wagatha Christie’ post

Rebekah Vardy has suffered “massive public abuse and ridicule” as a result of Coleen Rooney’s “Wagatha Christie” post, the Supreme Court heard today.

Giving her final arguments on the last day of her defamation trial, Hugh Tomlinson QC, to Rebekah, said she had suffered “very serious damage to her reputation” as a result of her post. Coleen.

He added: “The media is full of jokes about this case.

“This is the case with Ms. Vardy and the way she has been treated with thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of people on social media. She has been abused to this day.

“This is about her trying to do something to get on with her life.”

The Rooneys did not appear in court for the final night of the trial but flew to Dubai on a trip that had been booked before the trial was supposed to end on Wednesday.

Coleen’s attorney, David Sherborne, apologized for their absence.

In summary, Mr Tomlinson said Coleen had “failed to present any evidence” that Rebekah had “regularly abused her status as a trusted follower” on her personal Instagram account by Transfer information of The Sun from there.

He added: “Mrs Rooney instead advanced a remarkable ‘case theory’ based on Ms Vardy’s participation in an extremely complex, intricate and cunning plot to mislead the court. .”

Mr Tomlinson said the suggestion that Rebekah had a “conspiracy to delete” messages or that he had deleted some messages in a selective way was an “incredible theory”.

But Mr Sherborne told Mrs Justice Steyn that Rebekah’s loss of “important” documents was intentional, adding: “The only reasonable explanation is manual deletion by the plaintiff herself.”

He also said that, with this loss of evidence, if it could be inferred that the leaks to the press discussed in messages between Rebekah and her agent, Caroline Watt, were “the tip of the iceberg. sank”.

He also likened the absence of “central character” Ms Watt in the trial to “Hamlet without the Prince of Denmark”.

Justice Steyn will reserve her ruling until a later date.