Rachel Riley responds to Mike’s libel appeal – but she doesn’t have much to say
Remember my last update, when I stated that my appeal against Rachel Riley’s libel victory had been submitted and she had until December 21 to provide a short, written response?
She has – but there is nothing remarkable in it.
Her core argument is that the original judgment is so comprehensively against me that, even if parts of the appeal could succeed, the overall outcome would be the same so allowing the appeal to proceed would not be a good use of court time.
Basically, she’s saying even if the judge is found to have been wrong, we should not dare to suggest that this means her judgment may be mistaken. Can you see the problem with that?
I and my legal team did our best to head off these arguments in the papers we filed on December 7.
If we manage to succeed on parts of the appeal, it would undermine the evidence base for the rest of the judgment.
And the appeal identifies major errors, made by the judge, that undermine her judgment.
The next part of the case, according to the government’s Justice website, is apparently for my solicitors to send bundles and/or documents to the court, in support of the appeal.
I have a feeling that those bundles/documents should answer the points made by Ms Riley in opposing my appeal.
But of course, solicitors need to be paid for the high-quality work they do. So, please:
Make a donation via the CrowdJustice page. Keep donating regularly until you see the total pass the amount I need.
Email your friends, asking them to pledge to the CrowdJustice site.
Post a link to Facebook, asking readers to pledge.
On Twitter, tweet in support, quoting the address of the appeal.
Use other social media in the same way.
And don’t forget that if you’re having trouble, or simply don’t like donating via CrowdJustice, you can always donate direct to me via the Vox Political PayPal button, where it appears on that website. But please remember to include a message telling me it’s for the crowdfund!
This is a risky business. The courts seem fundamentally opposed to the reasoning that encouraged me to write an article about Ms Riley in the first place.
But it was the Court of Appeal that gave me the chance to present my case – and said that, if correctly argued, I should be able to win.
Given the opportunity to consider my evidence, I’m optimistic that I may secure another decision in my favour. Please help me get that chance.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
