Riley libel case: communication breakdown?

The Royal Courts of Justice in London, where the law is known to be harsh on defendants in libel cases.

By now, you’ll probably be aware that I was not granted permission to appeal against the judgment in Rachel Riley’s libel action against me and therefore lost the case.

It was a bitter disappointment, which I thought emphasised the harshness of UK libel judges against those of us who have to defend ourselves against allegations against us.

You’ll be aware that I am forbidden from commenting on the case by injunction – but I’m sure those of you who are familiar with the circumstances will have formed your own opinion about what happened, and therefore about the judgment.

Now I have to come to terms with that judgment. You’ll be aware that a High Court judge said I should pay £50,000 in damages to Ms Riley and £100,000 towards her court costs. I don’t have that kind of money.

And you might have been led to believe that Ms Riley is not seeking it, after comments by her legal representative Mark Lewis in the Jewish Chronicle. “Neither Rachel’s barrister nor Patron Law (Mr Lewis’ firm) will see a penny,” he said.

But as I understand it, he then went on to demand half of the CrowdJustice fund – which is impossible to supply because it has been spent on my defence and in any case may not be used for that purpose. Perhaps Mr Lewis would like to go on the record retracting that demand – or denying that he made it; either would suit me.

My own representatives have submitted proposals for a deal. The alternative for Ms Riley is to spend more of her money on proceedings to bankrupt me – plus the adverse publicity she’ll get from bankrupting a carer and defender of vulnerable people including those with long-term illnesses and disabilities.

I passed the relevant information to my representatives a week ago and have not heard a word from Ms Riley’s people since then.

Perhaps there has been a communications breakdown. If so, it is for the lawyers to sort out; I’ve done my bit.

Sadly, my own representatives have yet to be paid for their work on the ‘permission to appeal’ hearing. I’m aware that some of you may be unsympathetic to this after the court loss, but I also hear that there remains considerable support for me – so I’m keeping the CrowdJustice page for the time being and repeating my appeal. 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!

One good aspect of this is that I may have protected many other people who were threatened with libel proceedings by Ms Riley at the same time I was. The deadline for her to take action against them has passed so she cannot attack these people, who I believe were as sincere in their opinions as I was.

So, even in defeat, there are upsides to this affair.

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:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

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

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at

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:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:


4 thoughts on “Riley libel case: communication breakdown?

  1. Stephen Brophy

    I’m sorry but surely something can be done! I believe the judge deliberately found in Riley favour because she I’d in the public eye! the judgement seems wrong and I wonder if a judicial review could be arranged to review this case! if not then this country is lost and people must operate outside the law! it seems good people get no help but evil people….you know the rest…

  2. Julia

    I am so sorry Mike and family. I suspected this, but continued to hope that justice might prevail but sadly no. A prime example of how money and ‘celebrity’ buys everything these days. And no, no regrets chipping in to your fund. I admire your tenacity in trying to get justice and and am sure no right minded person would disagree.

    I am not sure of the exact definition of ‘SLAPP’ lawsuits but one definition I have read – ‘….. brought by individuals and entities to dissuade their critics from continuing to produce negative publicity…..’ – seems to me to be exactly this and legislation against it might be one good thing to import from the US!

Comments are closed.