Countdown star Rachel Riley is awarded £50,000 in damages
본문
Countdown star said she had been 'completely vindicated' today after she was awarded £50,000 in damages for libel from a political blogger who wrote an article claiming she was a 'serial abuser'.
Ms Riley, who appears on the letters and numbers show, sued Mike Sivier after he published an article on his website Vox Political in January 2019 with the headline 'Serial abuser Rachel Riley to receive 'extra protection' - on grounds that she is receiving abuse'.
The article discussed tweets posted as part of an online debate on antisemitism in the , some of which were exchanged between Ms Riley and a user who identified herself then as a 16-year-old called Rose in December 2018 and January 2019.
A judge previously found that Mr Sivier's article would be read as claiming Ms Riley 'engaged upon, supported and encouraged a campaign of online abuse and harassment of a 16-year-old girl', allegations denied by Ms Riley.
Mr Sivier defended the libel claim by arguing he had a 'reasonable belief' it was in the public interest to publish the claims in the article.
However, in a judgment on Wednesday, Mrs Justice Steyn ruled in favour of Ms Riley, granting her the five-figure sum in damages as well as an injunction requiring Mr Sivier to remove the article and not repeat it.
She said Mr Sivier had 'misrepresented the evidential picture' and that the article was 'wholly unbalanced'.
Mr Riley said this afternoon: 'I'm very pleased to have complete vindication in my libel case against Mike Sivier.
'He made very serious accusations which have been shown to be categorically untrue and wholly unreasonable.
'Over the course of the legal process Sivier has crowd funded over £233k by repeating what the court had already deemed to be perverse twisting of reality and outright lies.
Rachel Riley (left) and FastestVPN Mike Sivier (pictured right) outside London's High Court previously
'This is despite my offer for him to pay £1k to a children's charity and £4k of court fees to settle the matter, which he decided not to disclose during his extensive blogging and grifting.
'In the unlikely event that Sivier pays the £50k the court has awarded, any money I may receive will go to charity as has always been the plan. My motivation has always been to combat the lies which has been achieved through due legal process today.
'A big thank you too, to everyone who saw this nonsense for what it was.'
Mrs Justice Steyn said the blogger did not include any references to Ms Riley's denial of the allegation that she had bullied or encouraged the bullying of the 16-year-old and did not give the television presenter a chance to comment.
She said: 'It was not reasonable for Mr Sivier to assume, without giving any reason for his belief, that Ms Riley would not comment, rather than provide her with an opportunity to do so.
'The importance of giving Ms Riley an opportunity to comment prior to the publication of the article is particularly evident in light of the numerous matters on which Mr Sivier made assumptions.'
Mrs Justice Steyn said: 'Whether or not one agrees with the views Ms Riley articulated in her second thread to Rose, Ms Riley expressed herself in a polite and cordial way, providing information to a teenager who had sought to engage with her, and who had said this was a topic about which she was just learning.
'Ms Riley expressed the point that she found it hurtful to be accused of lying and encouraging a smear campaign in restrained and mild terms.'
The case has had a long and expensive journey through the courts.
In July Ms Riley and Mr Sivier came face-to-face as she gave evidence in the case.
Ms Riley (above) and Mr Sivier had faced off in court with Ms Riley seeking hefty compensation, as well as a permanent gagging order to prevent further publications
She said the amount of abuse she received increased significantly from January 9 2019.
Ms Riley told the court said: 'That's when the floodgates opened.
I changed my Twitter settings after that week because it was so horrendous.'
She continued: 'It was a whole load of abuse that I was receiving, that Channel 4 was receiving.'
The court heard that Mr Sivier in his online article had claimed the TV host, who took over from Countdown legend Carol Vorderman, was to receive extra security in the studio 'on grounds that she is receiving abuse' for her views on anti-semitism.
He went on to accuse her of hypocrisy, writing: 'Rachel Riley says she needs extra security on Countdown but her own behaviour has encouraged others to threaten a teenage girl's life'.
John Stables - for Ms Riley - said the article had a devastating impact, telling the court: 'the seriousness of baseless expressions of opinion, formed from the false facts, as to Ms Riley therefore being a hypocrite, of provoking her followers to subject the child to further abuse and harassment, including death threats, and therefore of acting 'obscenely', can hardly be in doubt'.
And to make matters worse, Mr Sivier's 'Serial Abuser' article continued to be published online, said the barrister.
Mr Sivier had originally defended the libel claim on the grounds of truth and honest opinion as well as public interest.
In January 2021, Mrs Justice Collins Rice struck out all three of Mr Sivier's defences, finding that they had 'no prospect' of succeeding at a full trial.
However, Mr Sivier won a challenge at the Court of Appeal four months later, finding that his public interest defence should be assessed at a trial.