after Coleen Rooney’s win in the defamation case… Rebekah VardyPA news agency looks at key findings in Mrs Justice Steyn’s opinion on the controversial battle against libel.
– Rebekah Vardy
Ms Justice Steyn made a number of findings about Rebekah Vardy, the wife of the footballer who filed the claim, and her evidence, during the seven-day trial.
In her ruling, Ms Justice Steyn said that while it was “probable” that Ms Vardy’s then-agent Caroline Watt “took the direct act” of passing the information on to The sunMrs Vardy “knew and approved of this behaviour”.
She said Ms. Vardy was also “actively involved” in the behavior, redirecting Ms Watt to Ms. Rooney’s private Instagram account, sending her screenshots and directing her agent to certain items.
The judge also ruled that Ms Watt and Ms Vardy “deliberately removed or destroyed evidence” in the case, showing “a pattern of working together to provide the press information”.
Ms Justice Steyn noted that Ms Vardy found the testifying process stressful and that she and her family had suffered “horrific abuse.”
However, the judge also said that key parts of Ms. Vardy’s evidence were “not credible”, at times “apparently inconsistent” with documentary evidence, and at other times “evasive” and that she was “generally unwilling to make factual concessions, however improbable her evidence is”.
She went on to say it was “probable” that Ms. Vardy was “trying to pressure Ms Rooney into settling a case that would have been fatally weakened, thus avoiding trial” by attempting to use witness statements on behalf of journalists falsely claimed they would say neither Ms Vardy nor Ms Watt were the source of the articles.
Ms Justice Steyn later said in her verdict that Ms Vardy had made a “conscious choice” to sit behind Ms Rooney during a match at the Euro 2016 tournament, dismissing her evidence as “not credible”.
“I don’t accept that she would like to have faded into the background,” Ms Steyn added.
However, Ms Justice Steyn said the evidence linking Ms Vardy to the short-lived “Secret Wag” section in The Sun was “thin” and did not support Ms Rooney’s defense of truth.
Ms Justice Steyn also accepted that Ms Vardy’s regret for giving a 2004 interview to News of the World about an alleged sexual encounter with Peter Andre was genuine.
– Caroline Watt
Ms. Vardy’s girlfriend and former cop, Ms. Watt, was described by the Supreme Court justice as “a vital witness to the cases in question, whose absence is conspicuous”.
Ms Justice Steyn discovered that Ms Vardy had provided information to Ms Watt in the knowledge that Ms Watt would then give it to a journalist from The Sun newspaper.
She also said that while Ms. Vardy made decisions about when to provide details to the press, “Mrs Watt acted according to her instructions”.
The judge said the evidence “completely contradicted the contention that Ms Watt acted alone, without Ms Vardy’s knowledge, consent or approval”.
Ms Steyn also said it can be inferred that Ms Vardy and Ms Watt “collectively leaked more information from the private Instagram account over the course of 2017-2019” than the eight messages in the libel suit.
The judge later ruled that Ms. Vardy chose not to call Ms. Watt to testify, in part because she knew her evidence “would turn out to be false.”
Ms Watt should have testified in support of Ms Vardy, but she withdrew her evidence before the trial, telling the court that this was due to health issues.
She said: “I have been forced to conclude that the main reason Ms Watt has been so reluctant to testify, and has suffered ill effects from the pressure to do so, was that she knew the evidence in her statements was a major share false.”
Ms Watt owned a phone that fell into the North Sea after a preliminary hearing, shortly after an order was given to inspect the device.
In a statement, Ms Watt said the loss was a “real accident” caused by choppy waters and a weakness in her hand while on a boat trip in Scotland.
However, Ms Justice Steyn said, “The timing is striking… the chances that the loss Ms Watt describes was accidental is slim.”
– Coleen Rooney
Ms Rooney, the wife of the footballer who defended the claim, was described by Ms Steyn as “an honest and reliable witness”.
She said in her statement, “She tried to answer the questions put to her without any evasion and without conveying any sense that she was giving pre-prepared answers.”
Ms Justice Steyn accepted evidence from Ms Rooney that she had not told anyone about her “sting operation” or the fabricated messages until she published the viral reveal post in October 2019.
– Wayne Rooney
The Supreme Court judge said Mr Rooney provided “fair and reliable evidence” during his time on the witness stand.
Ms Justice Steyn accepted his evidence that in 2016 then England manager Roy Hodgson had asked Mr Rooney to Jamie Vardy to talk to his wife about her media appearances.
“The evidence from Mr Rooney that he was asked to have this interview with Mr Vardy, and that he did, although it was a tricky issue for him to raise, came across as truthful,” she said. .
– Jamie Vardy
Ms Vardy’s husband did not testify at the trial and was present with his wife for one day.
The court was told that Mr Vardy had denied claims in an article in The Independent stating that Mr Rooney was “having conversations” with Mr Vardy about Ms Vardy’s media profile in 2016.
Ms Steyn said: “I bear in mind Mr Vardy’s contemporaneous denial in his message to Ms Vardy, but that probably reflects an understandable choice by Mr Vardy not to upset his wife by passing on what he may have considered if any unjust then any dishonesty or inaccuracy in the evidence Mr Rooney has given in court.”
She continued: “As Mr. Rooney immediately admitted, he cannot know if Mr. Vardy told his wife about the conversation he had with Mr. Vardy. It seems likely, given Ms Vardy’s reaction to seeing the article in the Independent, that Mr Vardy has not.”