Dr Christian Jessen

[Phil Anne Throw Pee]

Yep, but that poster also said "Glad he didn't get away with it" immediately following the sentence you quoted. Which, to me, means they're saying his misogyny is also relevant to his spat with Arlene Foster. I was simply saying otherwise.

I can't comment on who he didn't target, but he targeted her because of a rumour about her, which I obviously won't repeat here.

My point is that all homophobia is bad regardless of the gender of the person who espouses such views. Trying to make this solely about Arlene's gender, while ignoring her homophobia, is disappointing.

As is all misogyny.

 

[HockyRorror]

It has... been a week since the last donation and his GFM is still live and still his pinned tweet

View attachment 671688
Which is 6.5% of his original £150,000 target

@Yel posted a screenshot of the amended target on 29th June which showed he raised £9801. So in three weeks people have donated…£77. I can’t take the embarrassment…oh wait, yes I can




EDIT: I am terrible at maths so perhaps someone could provide the answer, but at £77per three weeks, how long would it take to reach the target?

 

[Yel]

I'm not using my calculator or astrophysics textbooks, but at that rate and it's steady decline I think the sun will burn out before he raises the target. Let alone the full fee for his and her legal costs

 

[AnderbeauJohnson]

@Yel posted a screenshot of the amended target on 29th June which showed he raised £9801. So in three weeks people have donated…£77. I can’t take the embarrassment…oh wait, yes I can




EDIT: I am terrible at maths so perhaps someone could provide the answer, but at £77per three weeks, how long would it take to reach the target?

I might have got the maths very wrong but this is what I came up with...

If he kept a consistent donation rate of £77 per three weeks (and it is going down lower than that but we'll be kind) it would be £25.66 per week

If we go with his initial target of £150,000 he still needs to raise £140,122

For ease of numbers that comes out to around 5,460 weeks

Which means he will hit his target in...

Wednesday 6th June 2125

 

[Lanavalentine]

I might have got the maths very wrong but this is what I came up with...

If he kept a consistent donation rate of £77 per three weeks (and it is going down lower than that but we'll be kind) it would be £25.66 per week

If we go with his initial target of £150,000 he still needs to raise £140,122

For ease of numbers that comes out to around 5,460 weeks

Which means he will hit his target in...

Wednesday 6th June 2125

I bet he’s buzzin, only 104 years to go!

 

[Ensay]

As is all misogyny.

Where did I say it wasn't?

I just think raising his misogyny is irrelevant to this particular issue because it was obvious that he was so gleeful about the rumour because of Arlene Foster's previous attitude to gay marriage. It's 'whataboutery' basically.

 

[Renegadedancer]

He deserves everything coming his way. You reap what you sow. Odious man.

 

[Yel]

I might have got the maths very wrong but this is what I came up with...

If he kept a consistent donation rate of £77 per three weeks (and it is going down lower than that but we'll be kind) it would be £25.66 per week

If we go with his initial target of £150,000 he still needs to raise £140,122

For ease of numbers that comes out to around 5,460 weeks

Which means he will hit his target in...

Wednesday 6th June 2125

Excellent work, although I think you need to factor in the ever diminishing donations. I'll be generous and say it's only falling by 10% a week.

Does that mean he'll hit it before 3021? Or is it more like 30021? I'm placing my bets on Yellowstone supervolcano blowing and wiping out humanity happening first

 

[henriettadubois]

Oh please!
I am for WOMEN!
Especially gay women’s rights number ONE.
Please don’t twist my bleeping words or comments with some ignorant fake woke BS.
I am commenting on this pos Doctor getting his dues, not Arlene and her abhorrent views.
Not irreverent at all.
Someone can be gay and hate women, which he does.
Do you really think he gives a duck about lesbians rights?

He is a misogynist who I am happy got his however it happened and THAT is what is relevant.

 

[Marj24]

Just had a quick look at the GoFundMe, last donation 21 days ago

 

[Tabitha D]

Aww, shame. Seems that Christian is not the beloved public figure he seems to think he is. He has an estimated £400,000 bill to pay. Obviously he thought he could get his adoring public to pay this for him, but no - looks like he will have to sell one of his flats (each valued well in excess of £1m) after all.
Boo boo.

 

[Ensay]

Aww, shame. Seems that Christian is not the beloved public figure he seems to think he is. He has an estimated £400,000 bill to pay. Obviously he thought he could get his adoring public to pay this for him, but no - looks like he will have to sell one of his flats (each valued well in excess of £1m) after all.
Boo boo.

My heart bleeds.

 

[monga]

Arlene putting the squeeze on

 

[Ensay]

I always find the monetary value of damages fascinating. The only time they make sense is when the person lost earnings (or will lose future earnings) as a result of someone else's actions. In that scenario, of course the person affected should be financially compensated for that.

But if someone's feelings were hurt, why do they often get tit loads of money? Surely not to pay for therapy, given that they often don't receive the money until long after the event.

I get that the person who committed the libel suffers financially (and I'm not against that) but I think it makes more sense for that money to then be used for the public good - something that provides benefit - because then something positive arises from it.

If I were awarded £125K but didn't lose any earnings, I think I'd have to give the majority of it to charity, or to people who actually need the money. I'd feel too guilty benefitting off it.

 

[Renegadedancer]

I think the reasoning behind it takes into account the massive legal fees and the hurt and anxiety caused. It also hopes to act as a deterrent to others. Jessen was found to be at fault so he needs to pay up.

In a different scenario I find it strange that a victim of crime receives a victim surcharge , sometimes for as little as a £1. Bizarre.

 

[Ensay]

I think the reasoning behind it takes into account the massive legal fees and the hurt and anxiety caused. It also hopes to act as a deterrent to others. Jessen was found to be at fault so he needs to pay up.

In a different scenario I find it strange that a victim of crime receives a victim surcharge , sometimes for as little as a £1. Bizarre.

But usually when damages are awarded it's a monetary amount plus legal costs.

A lot of my view comes from when I used to work in a complaints team. If a person's complaint had lost them money then we'd uphold their complaint and pay them the money back, usually plus a bit of interest and often extra if they'd spent money on phone calls to us.

However, originally if the person hadn't lost any money -- e.g. we'd been slow at paying out their claim -- we'd still pay them compensation (usually at least £50) even if they'd only made one phone call to us and on top of any late interest payment.

We then changed tack and, for complaints where no money had been lost, we sent them a gift by way of apology. Most people would be fine with it, but there was always a certain percentage who'd angrily complain that they wanted money not a gift - even if they hadn't actually lost any money. We'd just say "sorry that's our final decision" and would refer them to our independent arbitrator if they still had a problem. Used to make me smile how entitled some people are! Money doesn't undo a situation after all.

 

[HockyRorror]

It has... been a week since the last donation and his GFM is still live and still his pinned tweet

View attachment 671688
Which is 6.5% of his original £150,000 target

Just a friendly update () to state that the doctor has now reached £10,085 and has therefore been donated a whopping total of £207 since this post from July 20th.

 

[LennyBriscoe]

Just a friendly update () to state that the doctor has now reached £10,085 and has therefore been donated a whopping total of £207 since this post from July 20th.

Ah ha ha ha ha that’s what he gets for being a knob

 

[Tabitha D]

I’m amazed he’s got as much as £10,000 though. As the saying goes, a fool and his money are easily parted. Though in reality I suspect those were “anti-Arlene” donations rather than “pro-Christian” donations.
Gone a bit quiet about the “appeal” hasn’t he. The arrogant tosser. Maybe if he’d engaged with the legal process the first time round, rather than ignoring all the correspondence, the amount awarded wouldn’t have been so bad.
Looks like he’ll have to sell one of his £1m+ flats then after all. 🥲

 

[Captainmouse]

Any updates? Is there a time limit for him to pay?