Laurence Fox has been ordered to pay substantial damages after a high court ruling finds his online accusations of paedophilia to be baseless. Here’s the full story.
Online Wild West
Social Media has long been a Wild West, with little to no accountability for what people post online.
£90,000 in Damages
However, that changed recently following a ruling by the High Court in London; failed actor and politician turned right-wing grifter Laurence Fox has been ordered to pay £90,000 in damages to two individuals he referred to as “paedophiles” on social media.
Contentious Legal Battle
The verdict follows a long and contentious legal battle which was begun by Fox when he was accused of racism online.
Black History Month
The dispute arose from an argument online after supermarket chain Sainsbury’s posted about the company’s decision to create a safe space for black employees during Black History Month.
Taking the Bait
Fully taking the bait of corporate virtue signalling, Fox launched a lengthy screed against the supermarket chain, which ended with him calling for an official boycott of the store.
Posting on Main
As is often the case with online arguments, the thread took off, with users posting either in support of or against Fox’s stance.
Racism Accusations
The call for a boycott, in particular, led to Fox being accused of racism by Simon Blake, a former Stonewall trustee, and Colin Seymour, a drag artist known as Crystal.
“Paedophiles”
In the excitable swirl of online opinions, where simple arguments can quickly escalate, Fox ended up labelling Blake and Seymour as “paedophiles.”
Baseless and Defamatory
This exchange led all parties to the High Court, where the allegations were found to be baseless and defamatory.
“Undeserved Public Ordeal”
Mrs Justice Collins Rice, presiding over the case, stated, “By calling Mr Blake and Mr Seymour paedophiles, Mr Fox subjected them to a wholly undeserved public ordeal. It was a gross, groundless and indefensible libel, with distressing and harmful real-world consequences for them.”
Compensation for Damages
She continued, “They are entitled by law to an award of money, to compensate them for those damaging effects, and to ensure that they can put this matter behind them, vindicated and confident that no-one can sensibly doubt their blamelessness of that disgusting slur and that they were seriously wronged by it.”
Substantial Damages
Fox was ordered to pay substantial damages, £90,000 each, to each of the two men he defamed.
Pot Calling Kettle
Throughout the trial, Fox vehemently denied the accusations of racism levelled against him and argued that he had been a victim of racism himself.
“Anti-White Racism”
Fox told the court, “There’s huge quantities of anti-right white racism in the world. It’s the only acceptable form of racism there is left.”
“Racist Insult”
Fox went on to assert that the concept of white privilege was also racist, stating, “I choose to understand white privilege as a racist insult because it’s about the colour of your skin, and it’s not about the content of your character.”
Seriously Harming
Fox argued that the allegations of racism were seriously harming both his reputation and career prospects. Still, the court dismissed this counterclaim, emphasising the lack of evidence to prove his claims.
“Mr Fox Is a Racist”
During the six-day trial in November, Lorna Skinner KC, representing Blake and Seymour, asserted that the three “honestly believed, and continue honestly to believe, that Mr Fox is a racist.”
GB News
This is not the first time that Fox has been involved in controversy. Previously, he hosted a show on the hedge fund-backed right-wing news channel GB News but was fired after making derogatory comments about PoliticsJoe journalist Ava Evans.
“Past the Watershed”
Fox made the remarks to on-air host Dan Whooton, stating, “We’re past the watershed, so I can say this. Show me a single self-respecting man that would like to climb into bed with that woman – ever, ever.”
Almost 9,000 Complaints
Almost 9,000 people complained about the online exchange to media regulator Ofcom, which found the exchange broke broadcasting rules. Both Whooton and Fox were subsequently fired.
“Nothing Burger”
Speaking outside the court following the ruling, which Fox wrote off as a “nothing-burger,” and stated his intention to appeal.
“So Surreal”
After apparently not learning the lesson about the limits of free speech online, Fox went online to lament the ruling, stating, “You get the same wonga if you lose a leg at work. So surreal it’s almost funny.”
“Serious Harm”
On the same platform, Seymour expressed his happiness with the result and added, “I suggest Mr Fox spend some time reflecting on the serious harm he causes rather than fixating on his own self-inflicted martyrdom.”
Culture War of Words
While freedom of speech is a fundamental right, it is not absolute, and this latest case is a perfect example of the damage that can be done when the online culture war of words leaks out into the real world.
More Articles Like This…
Broken Britain: 12 Reasons Behind the UK’s Decline
Say the Unsayable: 10 Occasions When Farage Spoke His Mind About Britain
The post “Anti-White Racism” – Fox’s Online Rant Costs Him Big Time in Court first appeared on Edge Media.
Featured Image Credit: Shutterstock / Wirestock Creators.
Grant Gallacher is a seasoned writer with expertise in politics and impactful daily news. His work, deeply rooted in addressing issues that resonate with a wide audience, showcases an unwavering commitment to bringing forth the stories that matter. He is also known for satirical writing and stand up comedy.