Hopkins gets her come-uppance ?

Glad to hear it. Mind you its all publicity for her. I'd rather she just quietly went away. Nasty piece of work that she is.

I've had to google her - never heard of her.

I expect most of it will be paid by her publicists.

I'm sure she's loving the publicity

She is utterly, utterly vile and Jack was right to take her on. She will love the publicity I'm sure but what she tweeted had to be challenged and Jack was prepared to do it. This is the second time she's been involved in a libel case but her paper, the sainted DM, had to cough up last time.

She won't care. Her employers will pay it because the more notorious she is the more she is worth to them.

I too cannot stand this Woman,and she looks just what she is, as Jane10 said. A nasty piece of work. Well done Jack Good on ya

Vile,Vile Woman,well done Jack Monroe ?

Hopkins isn't quite one of us as Her Maj would say.

Might we be sued for publicly slagging her? Should we ask GNHQ to remove this thread?

KH is a professional provocateuse. It's her job and what she's paid to do because she has a natural 'talent' for it. In theory, I think a few characters like this in society are a healthy sign but it's still rotten for the Jack Monroes that she catches in her net.

'Slagging off' someone who has just lost her second libel case is not libellous - it's commenting on her behaviour. KH can tweet all she wants about how much she dislikes Jack as that's an opinion, but what she tweeted about her behaviour was a lie( as it was with the Muslim family). Also Jack has a reputation that can be harmed whereas KH is turning into a serial libeller

Personally I dont think the comments on this thread up to now are potentially libellous[unlike a post two or three days ago which might be]. Though I am not an expert.

I think the existence of KH is a sign of disease in society - there are many many healthy ways to provoke but her bullying, cruel, bilious approach is not one of them. Fortunately two of her recent targets have been able to afford the risks of suing. The Independent is reporting today that the legal fees will reach £300k - I'm just sorry that she can afford to pay them. The DM had to pay the fees for the previous case

I am not sure of gransnet policy on "slagging people off".
On mumsnet there seemed to be a weird one I thought.

Is she a "product" though? A "brand".

We dont know if the DM didnt want her to apologise, so to get more publicity for her, and thereby it?

There are still plenty of posters even on grasnnet, who ask "who is Katie Hopkins"?

rigby I couldn't agree more. There is such a nasty element in the UK.

This is a disease of society Rigby - you are correct.

WW it's not just the UK.

Re her losing the case HALLEFUUCKINGLUJAH!!

Regarding a nasty element in the UK, it is always best to start with ourselves first.

Somewhere between saint and sinner lies a happy medium.

There is nothing (so far ) on this thread that constitutes libel unlike KH's tweet which has landed her in this sh*t. Expressing an opinion is not expressing a fact and for Internet libel to stand up in court there has to be "evidence of a false and unprivileged statement of fact which is published with fault meaning as a result of negligence or malice and is designed to damage the reputation of a person or a company "in the estimation of right-thinking members of society".
The same principles apply broadly in Scotland which of course has its own legal system