The judge concluded that “significant parts” of Vardy’s evidence were not credible and that there were many instances where her evidence “was manifestly inconsistent with contemporary evidence, evasive or implausible”. He also said Vardy and her former agent Caroline Watt had deliberately destroyed potentially incriminating evidence. In one case, WhatsApp messages on Watt’s phone were lost after the device fell off the side of a boat in the North Sea, shortly after a search request. Vardy’s own copy of the same WhatsApp messages was lost during the backup process. The judge concluded: “It is possible that Ms Vardy deliberately deleted her WhatsApp conversation with Ms Watt and that Ms Watt deliberately threw her phone into the sea.” He also concluded that Vardy likely “knew, condoned and was actively involved” in the process of leaking Rooney stories to the Sun. There wasn’t much reputation to be damaged here, frankly, and Vardy admitted in court that her publicist had access to her account and may have done the deed on her behalf. The whole arbitrariness was interesting as it seemed to return England to a time—not too long ago!—when even the truth was not a sure defense to a claim of libel. This led to an overwhelming interest in the case not only from the tabloids as a whole but also from the British media in general. Even with the correct outcome, the slow pace of the trial and the huge costs imposed on the accused are a strong warning to would-be truth-tellers. However, an ancient precedent ultimately mattered: one from 1722 instructing judges to presume that damaged evidence does not favor the destroyer. Maybe that matters here too. This has been a burden in my life for a few years and I’ve finally come to terms with it…… pic.twitter.com/0YqJAoXuK1 — Coleen Rooney (@ColeenRoo) October 9, 2019
