New Girl on Countdown

[Bjornebye]

11 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

I didn't know specifically what you meant. I appreciate the clarification.

 

She's entitled to her opinion, and the "racist endeavour" image was a satirical response to Corbyn supporters calling the existence of a Jewish state a racist endeavour, and Corbyn's failure to properly address the issue of antisemitism in the Labour Party (his continued playing down of the issue being the reason he presently sits as an independent MP).

 

Either people have a right to satire or they don't. It's odd someone would defend photoshopped images of, eg, Jo Swinson running over squirrels but not a photoshopped image of Jeremy Corbyn. Very odd.

 

Yes, I know about the apartheid protest. It was one the Anti-Apartheid Movement asked him not to attend. He and his mates in the Revolutionary Communist Group were expelled from the movement on the request of the ANC. The ANC didn't want to be associated with him.

 

Look at what his placard actually said: "Defend the right to demonstrate against apartheid". It was a dig at the people who asked him not to protest. He and his ultra-left colleagues tried to take over the AAM. This is all documented in the press at the time.

Yes you did. 

[sir roger]

10 hours ago, Stickman said:

Looks like Anne Robinson is about to become an anti-Semite 

 

 

 

Robinson is a tiresome old bore , but I'm pretty sure she can suss a cunt pretty quickly , so the above story does not surprise me at all.

[Jairzinho]

3 minutes ago, sir roger said:

Robinson is a tiresome old bore , but I'm pretty sure she can suss a cunt pretty quickly , so the above story does not surprise me at all.

Yeah, basically Anne thought she is the tedious fucking cunt that she is and couldn't be arsed with her. 

 

Huge story.

[dockers_strike]

Anne Robinson is a pretentious uber cunt. Simply as.

[Rico1304]

21 hours ago, Jairzinho said:

Yeah, basically Anne thought she is the tedious fucking cunt that she is and couldn't be arsed with her. 

 

Huge story.

Ha ha. Anne, your mate. You big racist. 

[Strontium]

On 02/09/2021 at 10:24, Babb'sBurstNad said:

Whatever happened to her case against Laura Murray? Seemed to be on the verge of a verdict, then nothing.

 

Justice has been done, although Laura probably won't have to sell another Picasso:

 

https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/rachel-riley-awarded-10000-damages-after-suing-ex-corbyn-aide/

 

Quote

Rachel Riley awarded £10,000 damages after suing ex Corbyn aide

Countdown presenter and activist against antisemitism in Labour took legal action against Laura Murray over a tweet posted more than two years ago

Television presenter Rachel Riley has been awarded £10,000 damages by a High Court judge after suing a former aide to Jeremy Corbyn for libel.

Ms Riley, 35, a numbers expert on the Channel 4 show Countdown, sued Laura Murray, who is in her early 30s, over a tweet posted more than two years ago.

Mr Justice Nicklin oversaw the High Court case, in London, in May and delivered a ruling on Monday.

[Bjornebye]

 

 

He had heard how both women posted tweets after Mr Corbyn, who was then Labour leader, was hit with an egg while visiting a mosque in March 2019.

Ms Murray tweeted in response to a tweet by the television presenter.

 

Ms Riley initially posted a screenshot of a January 2019 tweet by Guardian columnist Owen Jones about an attack on former British National Party leader Nick Griffin, which said: “I think sound life advice is, if you don’t want eggs thrown at you, don’t be a Nazi.”

She added “Good advice”, with emojis of a red rose and an egg.

 

Later, Ms Murray tweeted: “Today Jeremy Corbyn went to his local mosque for Visit My Mosque Day, and was attacked by a Brexiteer. Rachel Riley tweets that Corbyn deserves to be violently attacked because he is a Nazi. This woman is as dangerous as she is stupid. Nobody should engage with her. Ever.”

Ms Riley said she was being sarcastic in her tweet, did not call Mr Corbyn a Nazi, and told the judge that Ms Murray’s tweet caused serious harm to her reputation.

Ms Murray was stakeholder manager in Mr Corbyn’s office when he was Labour leader, and went on to be the party’s head of complaints, before going into teaching.

She argued that what she tweeted was true and reflected her honestly held opinions.

Mr Justice Nicklin ruled at an earlier hearing that Ms Murray’s tweet was defamatory.

He concluded that the tweet meant Ms Riley had “publicly stated” Mr Corbyn had been attacked when visiting a mosque; that he “deserved to be violently attacked”; by doing so she had shown herself to be a “dangerous and stupid person” who “risked inciting unlawful violence”; and that people should not “engage with her”.

The judge was asked to consider whether serious harm had been caused to Ms Riley’s reputation, and whether Ms Murray had a defence of truth, honest opinion, or public interest.

Ms Riley, who studied mathematics at Oxford University and is on maternity leave from Countdown after giving birth in November, told the judge she was Jewish and had a “hatred of antisemitism”.

She said she spoke out against antisemitism and thought the Corbyn-led Labour Party was “fostering antisemitism”.

Ms Murray told the judge that her job had involved her working with the Jewish community to “try to find solutions to the problem of antisemitism which was becoming evident within parts of the Labour Party membership”.

Mr Justice Nicklin concluded that Ms Riley had demonstrated that Ms Murray’s tweet had caused serious harm to her reputation.

He found that both women had been truthful in the evidence they gave and had done their best to “assist the court”.

[Bjornebye]

Incidentally, some of the replies in this make me ashamed to be human 

 

 

 

 

[Total Longo]

20 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Incidentally, some of the replies in this make me ashamed to be human 

 

 

 

 

Every single one of them with a union flag in the bio as well, the absolute mutants

[AngryOfTuebrook]

42 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Justice has been done, although Laura probably won't have to sell another Picasso:

 

https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/rachel-riley-awarded-10000-damages-after-suing-ex-corbyn-aide/

 

So we're in favour of people being sued for libel now? Good to know.

[Rico1304]

1 hour ago, Bjornebye said:

 

 

He had heard how both women posted tweets after Mr Corbyn, who was then Labour leader, was hit with an egg while visiting a mosque in March 2019.

Ms Murray tweeted in response to a tweet by the television presenter.

 

Ms Riley initially posted a screenshot of a January 2019 tweet by Guardian columnist Owen Jones about an attack on former British National Party leader Nick Griffin, which said: “I think sound life advice is, if you don’t want eggs thrown at you, don’t be a Nazi.”

She added “Good advice”, with emojis of a red rose and an egg.

 

Later, Ms Murray tweeted: “Today Jeremy Corbyn went to his local mosque for Visit My Mosque Day, and was attacked by a Brexiteer. Rachel Riley tweets that Corbyn deserves to be violently attacked because he is a Nazi. This woman is as dangerous as she is stupid. Nobody should engage with her. Ever.”

Ms Riley said she was being sarcastic in her tweet, did not call Mr Corbyn a Nazi, and told the judge that Ms Murray’s tweet caused serious harm to her reputation.

Ms Murray was stakeholder manager in Mr Corbyn’s office when he was Labour leader, and went on to be the party’s head of complaints, before going into teaching.

She argued that what she tweeted was true and reflected her honestly held opinions.

Mr Justice Nicklin ruled at an earlier hearing that Ms Murray’s tweet was defamatory.

He concluded that the tweet meant Ms Riley had “publicly stated” Mr Corbyn had been attacked when visiting a mosque; that he “deserved to be violently attacked”; by doing so she had shown herself to be a “dangerous and stupid person” who “risked inciting unlawful violence”; and that people should not “engage with her”.

The judge was asked to consider whether serious harm had been caused to Ms Riley’s reputation, and whether Ms Murray had a defence of truth, honest opinion, or public interest.

Ms Riley, who studied mathematics at Oxford University and is on maternity leave from Countdown after giving birth in November, told the judge she was Jewish and had a “hatred of antisemitism”.

She said she spoke out against antisemitism and thought the Corbyn-led Labour Party was “fostering antisemitism”.

Ms Murray told the judge that her job had involved her working with the Jewish community to “try to find solutions to the problem of antisemitism which was becoming evident within parts of the Labour Party membership”.

Mr Justice Nicklin concluded that Ms Riley had demonstrated that Ms Murray’s tweet had caused serious harm to her reputation.

He found that both women had been truthful in the evidence they gave and had done their best to “assist the court”.

She won this one too.  £10k settlement 

[Strontium]

5 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

She won this one too.  £10k settlement 

 

Should send her an invite to this place, could be a nice little earner.

[Bjornebye]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah that was a fair outcome...... 

 

Disgraceful decision. 

 

[VladimirIlyich]

I haven't heard many attacks on the Jewish Community from Labour politicians other than condemnation of the Israeli government. If that is antisemitism then we live in horrible,horrible times. If it wasn't so serious a subject the stuff going on outside of the real issues would be almost laughable.

[Bobby Hundreds]

3 hours ago, Bjornebye said:

Incidentally, some of the replies in this make me ashamed to be human 

 

 

 

 

Isn't she from some insanely intelligent family, herself of course being one of those insanely intelligent people. I like her, I like her more that she's grinding the gears of racists and the type of twats who call people snowflakes but are completely up in arms themselves over anything that even slightly impedes on their ignorant limited world view.

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

I like the new numbers woman. She seems a genuinely nice person. Unlike her predecessor. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

4 hours ago, Bjornebye said:

Incidentally, some of the replies in this make me ashamed to be human 

 

 

 

 

Tommy H's Twitter bio has him down as a Tory Brexiteer.

 

I'm shocked.

[Spy Bee]

18 minutes ago, Nelly-Torres said:

I like the new numbers woman. She seems a genuinely nice person. Unlike her predecessor. 

And she's actually really clever.

[Rico1304]

3 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

And she's actually really clever.

Ha ha ha.  Very funny. 
 

Undoubtedly.  2 A levels at 11. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

4 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Should send her an invite to this place, could be a nice little earner.

I just went back to the first page, expecting to see loads of lecherous drooling (so I could make some dead witty comments about why she should swerve this place) and it's full of people complaining that she's shit at sums.

 

The fuck???

 

If she wants to sue about that, I'm with her.

[KMD7]

The new girl is great. I love her.

[sir roger]

You could have knocked me down with a blancmange when the Guardian's article

( posted earlier ) deliberately ignored the whole of this important part of the judgement.

 

"This case is unusual," said the judge

 

He added that Ms Murray's tweet had misrepresented what Ms Riley had tweeted. Yet he rejected Ms Riley's argument that Ms Murray had been "motivated by any improper purpose".

 

While not "bad conduct", he said Ms Riley's tweet could be viewed as "provocative, even mischievous".

 

"There is a clear element of provocation in the good advice tweet, in the sense that the claimant must have readily appreciated that the meaning of the good advice tweet was ambiguous and could be read as suggesting, at least, that Jeremy Corbyn deserved to be egged because of his political views," he concluded.

 

"The claimant can hardly be surprised - and she can hardly complain - that the good advice tweet provoked the reaction it did, including the defendant's tweet."

Such context, he said, was taken into consideration when deciding on the amount of damages she would receive.

 

The judge could have saved himself time by just writing ' Riley was defamed , but she is quite clearly a gargantuan cunt '

[Bjornebye]

2 minutes ago, sir roger said:

You could have knocked me down with a blancmange when the Guardian's article ( posted earlier ) ignored the whole of this important part of the judgement.

 

"This case is unusual," said the judge

 

He added that Ms Murray's tweet had misrepresented what Ms Riley had tweeted. Yet he rejected Ms Riley's argument that Ms Murray had been "motivated by any improper purpose".

 

While not "bad conduct", he said Ms Riley's tweet could be viewed as "provocative, even mischievous".

 

"There is a clear element of provocation in the good advice tweet, in the sense that the claimant must have readily appreciated that the meaning of the good advice tweet was ambiguous and could be read as suggesting, at least, that Jeremy Corbyn deserved to be egged because of his political views," he concluded.

 

"The claimant can hardly be surprised - and she can hardly complain - that the good advice tweet provoked the reaction it did, including the defendant's tweet."

Such context, he said, was taken into consideration when deciding on the amount of damages she would receive.

 

The judge could have saved himself time by just writing ' Riley was defamed , but she is quite clearly a gargantuan cunt '

She was clearly suggesting that Corbyn is a Nazi. It should be her paying damages. Horrible spoilt bitch who spouts her garbage but can’t take anything said back at her. Awful decision by the judge there, truly shocking. 

[Strontium]

Didn't realise so many here had law degrees from Twitter University. You learn something new every day.

[VladimirIlyich]

7 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Didn't realise so many here had law degrees from Twitter University. You learn something new every day.

Twitter has a University? 'Look ma' I can actually pass an entrance exam, finally.