Morally repugnant hypocrite would be a good ykw
Jack Monroe #306 Jack and the Giant Lawsuit
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Jack Monroe Threads Wiki
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Wonder if Jack's going to hit him with a law suitYikes Bob - 'both of them wanted more people going hungry' is quite the claim
Sorry if this has been mentioned, but Mark Lewis, her "Pro bono" lawyer has retweeted her "donate to the Trussell Trust instead of my crowdfunder" tweet.
Both plusnet and now broadband donāt require a credit check. Maybe the smol pixie will be able to get broadband after all so she can watch kickyball on the big screen.
Iām already wondering what her next chaos will consist of
Iām already wondering what her next chaos will consist of
Mein Gott kollegen fraus! I have found so many thread appropriate GIFs off the back of this <3
Tried three times for that less than three, kept typing pounds signs instead. I've been Jackified.
If this does actually go to court, this will be an absolute disaster for her. Even if the financials are not disclosed (which they may not be due to confidentiality), the defendants will be able to present reams of evidence - from the public domain - showing how sheās made her living over the years. All the TV gigs, sponsorships, Patreon etc. They can draw attention to the PayPal and tip jar, the Kickstarter, they can explain how influencers make their money (ads, affiliate links, monetised videos etc) - which would be interesting as I donāt think thatās widely understood by the public. And then they can say to the judge - wasnāt it therefore reasonable for my client to deduce that Jack had been earning a fair wedge?
They can also make the case that Jack has been less than transparent about money (the Kickstarter again, yesterdayās PayPal link, the fundraiser to give books to food banks, the Teemill thing, the many times vulnerable people have given her money). All of this is documented - most of it here.
And they can also make the point that Jack has been a little lax with the truth here and there. Her rather fancy home, for example. The fact that she originally said she was middle class - the many other inconsistencies in her story.
This is all stuff that they can and will put before the court in order to argue their case. Whatever the outcome of the case (if it happens), Jackās reputation will not survive this.
I actually doubt that sheās had a response from her lawyer yet. Who knows if he will even take it on. If he does, IMO itās highly doubtful he will do it on a no-win no-fee basis because then he or his firm bears the cost of the fees if they lose. And they may well lose. This is a million miles away from the Hopkins case.
Personally, I donāt care that it is the slightly unsavoury Lozza & friends who are the ādefendantsā here. Letās face it, no one else would take her on, whatever their doubts. And I do rather like the fact that Lozza is completely unfazed by her bullying. She wonāt like that - bullying usually works for her. You can sense her fury and incomprehension that heās not backed down. I do believe he would have no qualms at all in letting this go to court. In fact I think he is relishing the prospect.
p.s. a little aside about her wrongly identifying Richard Burgon. A case of mistaken identity. Libel, some might say. Like in the Hopkins case. Jack is such a raging hypocrite.
They can also make the case that Jack has been less than transparent about money (the Kickstarter again, yesterdayās PayPal link, the fundraiser to give books to food banks, the Teemill thing, the many times vulnerable people have given her money). All of this is documented - most of it here.
And they can also make the point that Jack has been a little lax with the truth here and there. Her rather fancy home, for example. The fact that she originally said she was middle class - the many other inconsistencies in her story.
This is all stuff that they can and will put before the court in order to argue their case. Whatever the outcome of the case (if it happens), Jackās reputation will not survive this.
I actually doubt that sheās had a response from her lawyer yet. Who knows if he will even take it on. If he does, IMO itās highly doubtful he will do it on a no-win no-fee basis because then he or his firm bears the cost of the fees if they lose. And they may well lose. This is a million miles away from the Hopkins case.
Personally, I donāt care that it is the slightly unsavoury Lozza & friends who are the ādefendantsā here. Letās face it, no one else would take her on, whatever their doubts. And I do rather like the fact that Lozza is completely unfazed by her bullying. She wonāt like that - bullying usually works for her. You can sense her fury and incomprehension that heās not backed down. I do believe he would have no qualms at all in letting this go to court. In fact I think he is relishing the prospect.
p.s. a little aside about her wrongly identifying Richard Burgon. A case of mistaken identity. Libel, some might say. Like in the Hopkins case. Jack is such a raging hypocrite.
If she's didn't have a twitter audience, it'd involve yelling at pigeons down the local park.
Well it's worse than anything LA said imo. She'll have to won't she? Or it makes her claims against other people, for damaged reputation whatever, look daft when they are milder.Wonder if Jack's going to hit him with a law suit
She really has started something I don't think she can finish.
After libel loneliness, Patreon emptyne-ee-eessss
She's totally screwed up because if she backs down now then her threat of legal action/100% success rate is gone and its only going to take one journalist to expose her
I would love if there was a problem with her PayPal and she got locked out of it for a month and had to live off her own earnings .... and slop.
Attachments
Yeah, well he will get paid either way so he might as well!
She's still liking stuff on twitter.
Babes, she didn't give them out for free. They cost over Ā£30k. It even says so in the headline. HTH x
Babes, she didn't give them out for free. They cost over Ā£30k. It even says so in the headline. HTH x
Just had a thought. What if Fox, or whoever she's suing, become a Jack patreon subscriber to gather additional evidence to use in court of subscribers receiving [checks notes] duck all.
She really is a gutless wonder.
Excellent summary. Plus would they look into all her claims of charitable donations? From all those interviews etc when she says 'obviously' she donated her fees to charity?
I think it would be relevant as a lot of her followers seem to think she donates almost all her fees to charity.
It presents her in a particular light, thus maybe encouraging more people to give her money.
Itās not giving them for free, itās getting other people to pay for them. So she still gets paid!
if you tolerate this then your money will be next
A designer grift for life
The intense humming of grifting
You stole the teemill money from the squigs
Am I the only one reading the āhahahaā as The Count from Sesame Street
(IT LEFT
)- Status