stewamax wrote:Lootman wrote:dionaeamuscipula wrote:Difficult to tell, but Rooney's reveal said "its......Rebekah Vardy's account" so not necessarily directly accusative of Vardy herself.
Yes but that is a fairly clear implication and might be deemed sufficient to represent libel, unless CR can prove it is true.
So RV could win if the court does not believe that it was RV's account but merely the account of someone connected to RV in some way.
Hmm... if RV's account was registered in her name (one must assume this was done by her or at her instruction) AND previous posts there are written in the first person and appear to be from her AND there is no indication that the account was hijacked, I think she is on a big ££loser (but Dom Pérignons all round for her lawyers)
But it raises the question that if someone starts using your account, can you be held liable for that subsequent content?
CR has the burden of proof here and yet most of the evidence offered that I have seen is circumstantial or inferential.