Laurence Fox loses bid for jury to hear his libel battle with Stonewall trustee, actress and drag artist he called ‘paedophiles’ during Twitter row
- Actor is being sued by former Simon Blake, Nicola Thorp and drag artist Crystal
- Mr Fox founded the Reclaim Party and stood for London mayor in elections
- Judge said he had ‘no hesitation’ in dismissing the actor’s bid for a trial by jury
Laurence Fox has lost his bid for a jury to hear his libel battle with three people he referred to as ‘paedophiles’ on Twitter.
The actor is being sued by former Stonewall trustee Simon Blake, former Coronation Street actress Nicola Thorp and drag artist Crystal following an online row in October 2020.
In turn, Mr Fox is counter-suing the trio over tweets accusing him of racism in an exchange following Sainsbury’s decision to celebrate Black History Month.
At a hearing last month, Mr Fox’s lawyers asked for the case to be decided by a jury rather than a judge – which is now highly unusual in defamation cases.
Alexandra Marzec, for Mr Fox, who founded the Reclaim Party and unsuccessfully stood as a candidate in the last London mayoral election, said that a jury would be better at reaching fair verdicts ‘in light of the cultural and social context of this case’, adding that judges could be subject to ‘involuntary bias’.
But in a judgment on Wednesday Mr Justice Nicklin said he had ‘no hesitation’ in dismissing the actor’s bid for a trial by jury.
Laurence Fox has lost his bid for a jury to hear his libel battle with Stonewall’s Simon Blake, actress Nicola Thorp and drag artist Crystal people he referred to as ‘paedophiles’ on Twitter. Pictured arriving at the Royal Courts of Justice in April)
He said: ‘The defendant has not satisfied me that a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude that there was a real possibility that a judge trying this case alone would suffer from ‘involuntary bias’.’
Mr Justice Nicklin added: ‘The fair-minded and informed observer must be taken to know that, faithful to his/her judicial oath, the judge in this case would be required to apply the law to the determination of the issues in the case, without fear or favour, affection or ill-will.’
He continued: ‘Because the definition to be applied to ‘racism’ in this case is a core issue, necessarily the judge deciding this issue will have to give a reasoned judgment on this very point.
‘That is a better safeguard of avoiding error than directing a jury trial.’
Ms Marzec had argued that a jury would be more suited for the libel trial because a written judgment would increase the likelihood of an appeal, arguing ‘culture war cases are magnets for appeals’.
However, Mr Justice Nicklin said that jury verdicts are difficult to appeal because juries do not usually give their reasons and, therefore, any errors in the law cannot easily be seen.
The spat began when the actor called on consumers to boycott Sainsburys after it posted that it had created ‘safe spaces’ for black people and was celebrating Black History Month.
Nicola Thorp (pictured on Good Morning Britain in 2018) said in the online spat: ‘Any company giving future employment to Laurence Fox or providing him with a platform does so with the complete knowledge that he is unequivocally, publicly and undeniably a racist’
Fox tweeted: ‘I won’t be shopping in your supermarket ever again whilst you promote racial segregation and discrimination.’
The supermarket later told Fox the ‘safe spaces’ were online support groups.
In response Crystal, a former RuPaul’s Drag Race contestant whose real name is Colin Munro Seymour, tweeted: ‘Imagine being so proud of being a racist, so cringe!’ to which Fox replied ‘says the paedophile.’
Nicola Thorp said in the online spat: ‘Any company giving future employment to Laurence Fox or providing him with a platform does so with the complete knowledge that he is unequivocally, publicly and undeniably a racist.’
Fox replied: ‘Any company giving future employment to Nicola Thorpe or providing her with a platform does so with the complete knowledge that she is unequivocally, publicly and undeniably a paedophile.’
In response Crystal, a former RuPaul’s Drag Race contestant (pictured) whose real name is Colin Munro Seymour, tweeted: ‘Imagine being so proud of being a racist, so cringe!’ to which Fox replied ‘says the paedophile’
Simon Blake, a Stonewall trustee (pictured) said: ‘What a mess, what a racist t**t’ to which Fox replied ‘pretty rich coming from a paedophile.’ He later said he regretted calling Fox racist
Simon Blake said: ‘What a mess, what a racist t**t’ to which Fox replied ‘pretty rich coming from a paedophile.’
He later said he regretted calling Fox racist.
He continued: ‘If the judge has made an error in his/her approach to determination of the issues relating to ‘racism’, then the Court of Appeal, and ultimately the Supreme Court, exist to put right that error.’
Mr Justice Nicklin continued: ‘Permission to appeal is given on the basis that the grounds of appeal have a real prospect of success or that there is some other compelling reason to grant permission.
‘Permission is not given on the basis that the decision relates to a ‘culture war’.’
In Mr Fox’s defence, the actor has said that an ordinary reader would have understood that his words ‘were ‘tit-for-tat vulgar abuse’, which did not bear a literal meaning that the claimants were paedophiles, and that the defendant ‘was giving the claimants a taste of their own medicine’.’
The judge also noted that both sides of the case have been ‘locked in a protracted period of unproductive and argumentative correspondence that fills almost an entire ring-binder’.
Source: Read Full Article
