Ebekah Vardy’s failed libel suit against Coleen Rooney is an “absolute disaster” to her reputation and “as damaging as it could be,” said one media lawyer.
Jonathan Coad said the prospects for Mrs. Vardy, who is married to… Leicester rush hour Jamie Vardyof getting notes or television work in the future “have suffered badly”.
On Friday, Ms Steyn dismissed Ms Vardy’s libel claim she made against Ms Rooney following a viral social media post.
Coad told the PA news agency: “It is an absolute disaster for… Rebekah Vardy. It really can’t get any worse.
“But of course it’s made worse by the fact that she volunteered and was the plaintiff, so she brought it with her.
“But it turned out to be about as damaging as it could be because not only did the judge find that what she was accused of doing, she actually did, which is not right, the judge also found her evidence to be unreliable.” was, which is a legal euphemism for “it’s not true.”
“But I also think that her prospects of getting approvals and getting television work have now suffered badly because her brand has suffered so much damage.”
Mr. Coad believes it is possible for Ms. Vardy to restore her reputation to some degree, as the “public has the ability to forgive,” but he doesn’t think she will completely undo the damage.
Leading reputation management attorney Mark Stephens agreed that Ms Vardy “regrets the day she ever filed this case” and believes she “will forever be branded as a fish lady and gossip as she has been through the judge”.
Mr. Stephens, a Howard Kennedy partner and reputation management expert, believes Ms Vardy’s reputation is beyond repair.
He told the PA news agency: “It would be very wise to live a quiet life somewhere on a remote island because when she appears in the media she will always be branded with the epithet ‘gossip Rebekah Vardy’, ‘traitor’ . of confidence Rebekah Vardy’.
“These kind of swear words will stick with her for quite some time.”
Mr Stephens said that while Ms Vardy will be more seriously affected, he believes Ms Rooney will not come out of the trial unscathed.
He added: “Coleen Rooney, who was deeply hurt by much of what she read and heard, will see it as a victory, but frankly, these kinds of Wagatha spats aren’t really amenable to public forensics in a court of law without it.” harm both parties.”
The so-called Wagatha Christie The trial became a sensation on social media and in the press as the wives of the two footballers continued to fight their case.
Stephens said high-profile cases like this and the recent trial of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard should be a reminder that the reputation of celebrities is “likely to be seriously damaged” by filing defamation cases.
“The lawyer’s job is to dismantle you brick by brick and both lawyers did it in this case, both lawyers acted like the boxer they are paid for,” he said.
Ayesha Vardag, a lawyer with reputation and private experience, argued that the case may not be a complete loss to Ms Vardy as it has attracted her media attention.
She said: “This story has meant that everyone now knows who Rebekah Vardy is, and it is a good platform for a smart, attractive woman with a strong personality to build new stories on.
“The next battlefield is the docu-drama. Maybe Rooney won the war, but Vardy can still win the peace.
“These two women are now bigger news than their supermen. That is quite something. And what they do with that is all to play for.”
Channel 4 recently announced that it has commissioned a two-part drama documentary showing a dramatic reconstruction of the trial.
In her verdict, Ms Justice Steyn said she felt it necessary to treat Ms Vardy’s evidence with “extreme caution.”
She said there were “many occasions when her evidence was clearly inconsistent with the contemporaneous evidence” and others where Ms Vardy was “evasive”.
Ms Justice Steyn added: “Mrs Vardy was generally unwilling to make factual concessions, however implausible her evidence may be.
“This inevitably affects my overall view of her credibility, although I’ve kept in mind that untrue evidence can be given to mask guilt or to reinforce innocence.”