Ultimately, as you know, Jack won a relatively small judgment, Ā£24,000 total. (the Judge notes max possible was Ā£300,000). Basically, the Judge notes here that part of the issue is with the way āthe defence has been conductedā, ie if KH had given a
duck and shown up to testify/engaged with her defence team appropriately in any part of the case, or actually said sorry long before it got to court, things might have been different. As has been noted elsewhere here, the Judge also comments that this should have been resolved long before it got to court (and not wasted a
tit ton of time and money). Nobody came out of this looking good, though in the aftermath, in the eyes or people who exalted Jack for āsticking it toā Hopkins she became a bizarre lefty hero.
The Judge had the below to say at the very end. (note hereās the ref to KHs analytics I described above). Judge is clearly unimpressed with Jack though. āDifficulties over disclosureā of evidence ESPECIALLY ON JACKāS SIDE. Judge doesnāt go into whether they think that was deliberate or not āI am not able to attribute responsibility for that on the basis of the evidence, and I do notā, but says that regardless, litigants are responsible for producing evidence and not going on sprees to mass get rid of s whether accidentally or on purpose.
Also says attorneys need to keep their clients in line and make sure they donāt LITERALLY destroy evidence (or evidence of lack of evidence for that matter, like evidence OR NOT of alleged āabuse and death threatsā)