It's one thing having someone publish in the public domain that you are a paedophile, I'm guessing it wasn't just Joseph "freedom fighter" Barton calling him that once Barton's incel army had got the scent and piled on. Even if Barton was telling the truth about an unwritten agreement outside of court, the ongoing abuse from Barton's followers would make most people want to get more substantial redress for the constant harassment with completely unsubstantiated allegations of such a vile crime.
I don't care how tedious Jeremy Vine's broadcasting is, Barton is such a pathetic jumped-up playground bully pissing in the well of humanity that I'm quite happy for it to be Vine who knocks him down a peg or ten.
A lot of football people seem to think they have free reign to be abusive when and to whom they like, with little consequence.
Barton, like the lovely Leon Knight discovered, is quickly finding out that you can get into deep water very quickly and he'll definitely think twice next time. Or at least have to hire a lawyer to double check his tweets first.
No way should Joey Barron be allowed to write the things he did about Jeremy Vine, or anybody else of whom it was false. Since JB didn't retract the allegations JV had no options but to go to court with a judge ruling in JVs favour, it's only the amount of damages that has now been settled.
There was an initial hearing where it was ruled that there was a case to answer, but the case has not been brought to trial, it has been settled out of court. Had it gone to trial, only after reaching a verdict would costs and damages have been decided, not before trying the case.
In answer to your other point, obviously the laws on libel and slander are there for our protection and the option to pursue a civil suit is important, it was not on those grounds that I made my remark. My comment was made because court time is a finite resource and with waiting times for criminal proceedings desperately long, resolving social media spats is a very poor use of that time.
This really was a battle of 2 obnoxious dickheads, pleased that Barton lost & will have to pay damages & costs, but as others have said Vine will film his own death before long.
Jeremy Vine was in the press yesterday saying it is not over. His solicitor asked Barton for £75k, an apology and his legal costs for the first 5 tweets. There are still 5 more to be sorted out.
He has also set up a go fund me page, I assume to pay for it and is at £17,000 after 1.2 thousand donations. Crazy.
I complete agree, he wanted to see whether the initial hearing upheld the fundamental basis of his defence and when it didn’t he immediately moved to spare himself exposure to further costs. In many respects it is an efficient system for minimising protracted battles.
I see that he now has to pay another £35k for the tweets he wrote after Vine’s legal team stepped in. Please tell me he’ll never work in football again.
No. It's a fixed penalty, which the recipient can choose to pay instead of being prosecuted. If he decides to fight it, and is then convicted in the Magistrates' Court, it then becomes a fine.
Most people refer to any sort of fixed penalty as a fine, but they are not. Doncaster Council even say on their link, that it is an alternative to prosecution.
Comments
It's one thing having someone publish in the public domain that you are a paedophile, I'm guessing it wasn't just Joseph "freedom fighter" Barton calling him that once Barton's incel army had got the scent and piled on. Even if Barton was telling the truth about an unwritten agreement outside of court, the ongoing abuse from Barton's followers would make most people want to get more substantial redress for the constant harassment with completely unsubstantiated allegations of such a vile crime.
I don't care how tedious Jeremy Vine's broadcasting is, Barton is such a pathetic jumped-up playground bully pissing in the well of humanity that I'm quite happy for it to be Vine who knocks him down a peg or ten.
Totally this.
A lot of football people seem to think they have free reign to be abusive when and to whom they like, with little consequence.
Barton, like the lovely Leon Knight discovered, is quickly finding out that you can get into deep water very quickly and he'll definitely think twice next time. Or at least have to hire a lawyer to double check his tweets first.
Whatever became of the delightful Mr Knight? Wikipedia has no info on him after about 2016.
He realised that just posting "how you living" to everyone pointing out he's a hateful individual probably wasn't very satisfying.
And probably got legal advice telling him to stop posting on line as it'd simply lead to more problems.
He was fairly forgettable for us, but I think I remember a surprisingly good overhead kick.
Funnily enough I quite like Tim Vine.
Tim Vine is great, the master of the one liners.
Edit. Link added to some of his best known ones.
https://inews.co.uk/light-relief/jokes/tim-vine-best-jokes-and-one-liners-88044
I really want to see Fearmoth but I don't think it's ever had a public showing or release of any kind.
I tell a lie, it's online! https://invidious.perennialte.ch/watch?v=ojtL9DIWOh8
£75k + costs against Barton...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp33exz7xe1o
Might stop Barton's little reign of nonsense for a bit.
Embarrassing little climb down comments from him.
Glad this has been settled out of court, this sort of thing is a complete waste of court time.
Not quite sure that's correct.
No way should Joey Barron be allowed to write the things he did about Jeremy Vine, or anybody else of whom it was false. Since JB didn't retract the allegations JV had no options but to go to court with a judge ruling in JVs favour, it's only the amount of damages that has now been settled.
There was an initial hearing where it was ruled that there was a case to answer, but the case has not been brought to trial, it has been settled out of court. Had it gone to trial, only after reaching a verdict would costs and damages have been decided, not before trying the case.
In answer to your other point, obviously the laws on libel and slander are there for our protection and the option to pursue a civil suit is important, it was not on those grounds that I made my remark. My comment was made because court time is a finite resource and with waiting times for criminal proceedings desperately long, resolving social media spats is a very poor use of that time.
This really was a battle of 2 obnoxious dickheads, pleased that Barton lost & will have to pay damages & costs, but as others have said Vine will film his own death before long.
I don’t understand why you got downvoted Barton is obnoxious and Jeremy Vine is a dickhead.
I Wonder if Tim has considered asking his brother if he could not be such a cock.
Met Jeremy Vine and he was a thoroughly nice bloke as it happens, didn’t down vote you though!
I think it was putting him into the same description as Barton which is ridiculous.
Zero chance Barton would have settled without the threat of court.
Jeremy Vine was in the press yesterday saying it is not over. His solicitor asked Barton for £75k, an apology and his legal costs for the first 5 tweets. There are still 5 more to be sorted out.
He has also set up a go fund me page, I assume to pay for it and is at £17,000 after 1.2 thousand donations. Crazy.
As we hurtle back to the days of toffs and serfs hopefully these two will settle their petty disputes with a duel.
I complete agree, he wanted to see whether the initial hearing upheld the fundamental basis of his defence and when it didn’t he immediately moved to spare himself exposure to further costs. In many respects it is an efficient system for minimising protracted battles.
You've got to be an absolutely deplorable human being to contribute to a Joey Barton horrible comments pay off fund.
If I were the judge, I'd set the fine as whatever that fund raises + the original fine.
I want to see Barton dressed in Burberry armed with a copy of Au Recherche Du Temps Perdu, Vine in high viz and Lycra, wielding a bike pump.
Putting on my legal pedantry hat, there is no 'fine' involved here. Fines can only be levied in the criminal courts, but this is a civil matter.
The Judge can make an award of damages, plus the legal costs of the successful party.
I see that he now has to pay another £35k for the tweets he wrote after Vine’s legal team stepped in. Please tell me he’ll never work in football again.
Isn't a penalty notice issued by the police a "fine" in strict legal terms?
No. It's a fixed penalty, which the recipient can choose to pay instead of being prosecuted. If he decides to fight it, and is then convicted in the Magistrates' Court, it then becomes a fine.
I used to get "fined" regularly for the late return of library books but never went to Court!
Doncaster Council seem to think a Fixed Penalty Notice is a fine:
https://www.doncaster.gov.uk/services/environmental/fixed-penalty-fines
(As does pretty much everyone else on Google)
Is @bargepole Lionel Hutz in disguise?
Most people refer to any sort of fixed penalty as a fine, but they are not. Doncaster Council even say on their link, that it is an alternative to prosecution.
Only the Courts can issue fines, and they are then recorded on the Register: Registry of Judgments, Orders and Fines - Fines (rojof.org.uk)