Quantcast
More

    Coleen Rooney ‘had a SPY in the Vardy camp’: New twist in Wagatha Christie case

    Coleen Rooney ‘had a SPY in the Vardy camp’: New twist in Wagatha Christie case as source claims ‘inside man’ is ‘willing to talk’ about Rebekah

    • Coleen Rooney reportedly told friends she has a ‘spy’ in the Rebekah Vardy camp
    • A source close to Coleen Rooney says insider would be willing to speak in court 
    • Mrs Rooney, 34, accused Mrs Vardy, 38, of giving the press ‘false stories’
    • In response to the claim, Mrs Vardy is suing Rooney for libel at the High Court

    Coleen Rooney had a spy in the Vardy camp, it has been claimed in a new twist in the Wagatha Christie case, as source claims an insider is ‘willing to talk’ about Rebekah.

    She reportedly told friends that the insider was ‘extremely close’ to Mrs Vardy.

    Mrs Rooney, 34, accused Mrs Vardy, 38, of giving the press ‘false stories’ about her private life last October after carrying out a months-long ‘sting operation’ which saw her dubbed ‘Wagatha Christie’.

    The wife of former England star Wayne Rooney claimed fellow footballer’s wife Mrs Vardy – wife of Jamie Vardy – shared fake stories she had posted on her personal Instagram account with The Sun newspaper. 

    Mrs Vardy, who is married to Leicester City striker Jamie Vardy, denies the accusations and is suing Mrs Rooney for damages for libel at the High Court in London.

    Mrs Rooney believes the unnamed mole’s evidence could be key in her on-going High Court battle with her rival. 

    Rebekah Vardy arrives at the National Ice Centre in Nottingham for a Dancing On Ice 2021 training session last week

    Coleen Rooney (left, in Manchester on Friday) and Rebekah Vardy (right, at the National Ice Centre in Nottingham for a Dancing On Ice 2021 training session last week) are locked in a battle at London’s High Court

    Rebekah Vardy (top) and Coleen Rooney watch England v Wales during Euro 2016 at Stade Bollaert-Delelis in Lens, France. Mrs Rooney, 34, accused Mrs Vardy, 38, of giving the press 'false stories' about her private life last October after carrying out a months-long 'sting operation' which saw her dubbed 'Wagatha Christie'

    Rebekah Vardy (top) and Coleen Rooney watch England v Wales during Euro 2016 at Stade Bollaert-Delelis in Lens, France. Mrs Rooney, 34, accused Mrs Vardy, 38, of giving the press ‘false stories’ about her private life last October after carrying out a months-long ‘sting operation’ which saw her dubbed ‘Wagatha Christie’

    The pair are set to hold last-ditch peace talks – which may involve their footballing husbands – but Coleen Rooney is said to have a trick up her sleeve that she will use if the matter goes to court.

    According to The Sun, the insider is prepared to oppose Rebekah Vardy in court.       

    ‘Coleen is prepared for anything. She has loads of strong evidence, including statements, and is planning to call witnesses if this goes all the way to trial,’ a source told the newspaper.  

    ‘Coleen also has a big reveal up her sleeve which she intends to use if this gets to court. Her team has an inside man extremely close to Rebekah who is willing to talk.’ 

    But in response to the reports suggesting there was an insider willing to talk, Charlotte Harris, of Mrs Vardy’s legal firm Kingsley Nap-ley, said ‘there can be no mystery witness to something that did not happen.

    ‘The simple fact is that Rebekah Vardy did not leak Coleen Rooney’s private Instagram posts and nothing can change that,’ she said.

    Mrs Rooney wrote on Instagram and Twitter: 'I have saved and screenshotted all the original stories which clearly show just one person has viewed them. It's ……………. Rebekah Vardy's account.'

    Mrs Rooney wrote on Instagram and Twitter: ‘I have saved and screenshotted all the original stories which clearly show just one person has viewed them. It’s ……………. Rebekah Vardy’s account.’ 

    The pair have until February 8 to reach a settlement over the disagreement, or must prepare for a five-day libel hearing next year.

    On October 20, Rebekah Vardy won the first round of her libel battle against Coleen Rooney, when the court ruled the post ‘clearly identified’ Mrs Vardy as being ‘guilty of the serious and consistent breach of trust’. 

    Minutes later Mrs Rooney hit back with a statement via her spokesman, saying she was ‘keen’ to hear what Mrs Vardy has to say in court.

    Mrs Rooney infamously wrote on Instagram and Twitter: ‘I have saved and screenshotted all the original stories which clearly show just one person has viewed them. It’s ……………. Rebekah Vardy’s account.’ 

    Why does last week’s ruling in the case matter? 

    Last week’s ruling at the High Court related to the wording in the final sentence of Coleen Rooney’s infamous Instagram post, in which she accused Rebekah Vardy of leaking ‘false stories’ about her private life to the media.

    She wrote: ‘I have saved and screenshotted all the original stories which clearly show just one person has viewed them. It’s ……………. Rebekah Vardy’s account.’

    Mrs Rooney claimed she simply referred to Mrs Vardy’s Instagram account rather than Mrs Vardy herself.

    But the judge said an ordinary reader would not take the word ‘account’ to ‘indicate that Mrs Rooney remains in doubt about who the wrongdoer was’.

    Today, the judge made an important ruling that the post ‘clearly identified’ Mrs Vardy as being ‘guilty of the serious and consistent breach of trust’.

    He also disagreed with Mrs Rooney’s claim that using multiple ellipses in the final line diluted the meaning. 

    This means the court has no doubt as to who the accusation was made against – Mrs Vardy – which will be a consideration if the libel case goes to trial next year.

    Advertisement

    The ruling at the High Court last week related to the wording in the final sentence of the post, with Mrs Rooney claiming she simply referred to Mrs Vardy’s Instagram account rather than Mrs Vardy herself.

    But the judge said an ordinary reader would not take the word ‘account’ to ‘indicate that Mrs Rooney remains in doubt about who the wrongdoer was’. He also disagreed with Mrs Rooney’s claim that using multiple ellipses in the final line diluted the meaning.

    This means the court has no doubt as to who the accusation was made against – Mrs Vardy – which will be a consideration if the libel case goes to trial next year.

    Mrs Rooney’s spokesman told MailOnline following the ruling: ‘Today’s ruling on the technical legal meaning of the post changes nothing. Coleen’s defence to this misguided action was filed last month. 

    ‘It sets out clearly the facts of her case, which remain the same irrespective of any decision on the meaning. The key issues of the case remain the three stories from Coleen’s private Instagram account published by The Sun and Rebekah’s relationship with the newspaper, including its ‘Secret Wag’ column.

    ‘Coleen is pleased the judge has ordered that Rebekah must file her reply to the defence, on oath, by no later than December 8. After three years of stress and anxiety about the leaks from her private social media account, Coleen is keen to see progress made on the real issues, beginning with what Rebekah has to tell the court.’  

    Mr Justice Warby ruled that the ‘natural and ordinary’ meaning of Mrs Rooney’s posts was that Mrs Vardy had ‘regularly and frequently abused her status as a trusted follower of Ms Rooney’s personal Instagram account by secretly informing The Sun newspaper of Ms Rooney’s private posts and stories’. 

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here

    Latest Posts