Jamie Vardy dragged into wife Rebekah’s £1million ‘Wagatha Christie’ war with Coleen Rooney

1

View
comments

Premier League footballer Jamie Vardy has handed over his mobile phone to Coleen Rooney’s legal team as part of his wife Rebekah Vardy’s ‘Wagatha Christie’ libel battle, it emerged today.

The latest round of the costly legal row between the two WAGS is currently being played out in the High Court over claims that Ms Vardy leaked stories about Ms Rooney in the media.

Lawyers for Ms Rooney, 35, are requesting full disclosure of all communication between Ms Vardy, 39, and her agent Caroline Watt, who they argue worked together to leak the stories to The Sun.

Ms Vardy’s lawyers are also demanding further disclosure of communication between Ms Rooney and six other people who are close to her.

It was initially claimed in a statement by Ms Rooney’s solicitor Paul Lunt that Leicester City striker Jamie, 35 had defied a senior judge’s order to hand over his phone for examination after he was identified as being one of those who had access to Ms Vardy’s Instagram account.

She had also told Ms Rooney’s legal team that Jamie’s WhatsApp messages were no longer available because he was subjected to a hack and his account was deleted and not restored.

But sources close to the case have revealed that Jamie’s phone has now been examined by specialists on behalf of Ms Rooney’s legal team although nothing of any significance is believed to have been uncovered. 

Jamie, his social media manger Adam Jones and Ms Watt were all ordered to hand over their mobile phones for examination at a hearing last year because they could contain material that is vital to the case.

On the second day of the High Court hearing for greater disclosure of evidence, David Sherborne, representing Ms Rooney claimed that Ms Vardy encouraged her agent to leak stories to The Sun newspaper.

He said: ‘She had the means to leak the stories because she had access to Mrs Rooney’s private Instagram account and encouraged Ms Watt to [share them].

‘Mrs Vardy knew perfectly well what she [Ms Watt] was doing and was behind it and encouraging it.’

Referring to Ms Watt, he added: ‘She was the person who was actively finding and monitoring Mrs Rooney’s private Instagram account and leaked private information from these posts to The Sun.’

Hugh Tomlinson, QC representing Ms Vardy claimed that WhatsApp messages between her and Ms Watt, which were presented in court and showed the two women abusing Ms Rooney and discuss leaking stories about her had been ‘taken out of context.’

He told Mrs Justice Steyn that Ms Vardy and her legal team wanted greater disclosure of communication between Ms Rooney and six people, who she had identified as ‘custodians.’

They include her brother John McLoughlin, Wayne Rooney’s sister; Claire Rooney; two PR advisors and football agent Paul Stretford.

Vardy’s lawyers allege that Ms Rooney or her legal team have not made an attempt to conduct ‘proper searches’ of material belonging to them that is relevant to their case. 

It comes as the High Court heard how Rebekah Vardy’s agent allegedly plotted a ‘cover up’ by ‘lying’ that former staff were to blame for leaking stories about Coleen Rooney if it became ‘undeniably obvious’ her client was responsible. 

After one story from Rooney’s private Instagram appeared in the Sun, Ms Rooney told her followers: ‘Someone on here is selling stories again to this scum of a paper. It’s sad to think someone who I have accepted to follow me is betraying [me] for either money or to keep a relationship with the press.’ 

Discussing this post, Ms Watt is said to have acknowledged a role in providing information to the newspaper, according to messages disclosed to the court, writing: ‘Such a victim. Poor Coleen … And it wasn’t someone she trusted. It was me.’

The pair are said to have then discussed concerns that Ms Rooney increasingly suspected Ms Vardy of leaking to the media and had unfollowed her on Instagram.

Ms Watt allegedly suggested that if any issues were raised they would claim ‘one of the girls in the office has my old laptop that had your passwords saved on it, so it will have been them’. 

In other messages, Ms Vardy is said to have viciously described Ms Rooney as a ‘c***’ and a ‘nasty bitch’ while revealing she wanted to leak stories about her in a series of heated WhatsApp exchanges with her agent, the High Court heard yesterday.

Today Ms Vardy’s lawyer, Hugh Tomlinson QC denied that her saying ‘She’s a nasty bitch’ in a WhatsApp message to her agent was a reference to Ms Rooney.

Mr Tomlinson insisted that the message, along with others, had been taken out of context and that earlier messages showed she was talking about somebody else.

He told the court: ‘That’s not right, this isn’t a passage about Mrs Rooney, this is a passage about someone else.’

He also maintained that another message in which Ms Vardy refers to being ‘up her own a**e’ was also not about Ms Rooney, as had been alleged.

Mr Tomlinson further insisted that a message in which Ms Vardy wrote to her agent, ‘would love to leak those stories’ actually indicated that she did not leak stories about Ms Rooney.

He added: ‘The question is whether stories are leaked. Her saying I would have loved to have leaked a story suggests she didn’t leak a story.

‘If you say I would have loved to have gate-crashed that party, loved to have an affair with that person, or whatever it is, it’s an indication of the reverse, not an indication that she did it.

‘It’s an expression of a desire to do something which you didn’t, not an indication that she did it.’

In another message between the two, it was claimed, Ms Vardy declared ‘It’s war’ after Ms Rooney publicly named her as the source of the leaks in October 2019.

During another exchange after Ms Rooney had been involved in a car crash and posted about it on Instagram, it is claimed Ms Vardy wrote in a WhatsApp message to Ms Watt: ‘She’s a nasty bitch x’ and added: ‘Would love to leak those stories.’

Ms Watt replied: ‘I would have tried to have done a story on Coleen but the evidence has been deleted x,’ with Ms Vardy then passing on details about the post to her. 

The court heard that the two women then discussed leaking the story to The Sun with Ms Watt writing to Ms Vardy a few days later that a journalist from the newspaper is ‘trying to do a story on Coleen crashing her car but her PR won’t even reply. I’ve told him I’m 100% confident that it happened but don’t know how’.

‘She deffo did,’ Ms Vardy responded. 

An article then appeared on January 25, 2019 about Ms Rooney being involved in a car crash, prompting her to take to Twitter where she fumed that ‘someone on my private Instagram…. is telling or selling stories to a certain newspaper.’

She added: ‘It’s sad to think someone who I have accepted to follow me is betraying me either for money or to keep a relationship with the press.’

In a subsequent WhatsApp exchange, the court heard, Ms Vardy messaged Ms Watt, saying: ‘U seen Coleen’s Twitter.’

Ms Watt replied: ‘Such a victim. Poor Coleen…. And it wasn’t someone she trusted. It was me.’

A few days later the two women discussed via WhatsApp a picture posted by Ms Rooney in her car which appeared to show one of her children not wearing a seatbelt.

Ms Watt warned her that because it was on Ms Rooney’s private Instagram, ‘we can’t do anything with it.’ She added: ‘She has taken it down now too.’

Ms Vardy fumed: ‘She’s such a d*** x.’

Another exchange, the court heard, showed Ms Vardy complaining how Ms Rooney ‘thinks it’s me that’s been doing stories on her’. 

‘I know x’, Ms Watt replied. 

‘That c*** needs to get over herself! X,’ wrote Ms Vardy, before adding: ‘Someone on her Instagram regularly sells stories on her though x.’ 

Ms Watt said: ‘Because she is private she can remove you as a follower and it stops you from seeing her page x.’ 

‘What a joke! All I’ve ever been is nice to her though! Even when Wayne was being a c*** x,’ Ms Vardy said. 

David Sherbourne QC, representing Ms Rooney, read out transcripts of other messages in which Ms Vardy is said to abuse her.

In one, which the court heard was sent to Ms Watt after she discovered that Ms Rooney had unfollowed her, Ms Vardy wrote: ‘Omg… I just saw wow… what a c**t… I’m going to message her.’ 

After being advised by Ms Watt not to contact Ms Rooney immediately, Ms Vardy replied: ‘That c*** needs to get over herself. That’s falling out material.’

It is claimed the two women then discussed the ramifications of what would happen if Ms Rooney finds out for definite that she was involved in leaking stories about her and that the story on the car crash came from Ms Watt.

Ms Watt replied: ‘I don’t think anyone would. The [journalist] never would and I wouldn’t tell anyone but The Sun and you would think she’d message you if someone said your agent had done that surely.’

A message exchange between the two women from October 2019, following Ms Rooney’s post claiming Ms Vardy was responsible for leaking stories about her shows them discussing how they can explain the leaks.

Ms Watt tells Ms Vardy that if she ‘tries to say it was me’ she would claim that she had ‘left the company’ and that could blame an employee with access to her old laptop. Mr Sherbourne described this in court as the ‘fake user claim.’

Ms Vardy replies in a message: ‘Ok! Just don’t know how she ever would know that unless [the Sun journalist] has leaked it.’ 

Other WhatsApp messages between Ms Vardy and Ms Watt show them discussing a post from Ms Rooney in April 2019, in which she hinted that she was travelling to Mexico for gender selection.

It later emerged that this was a deliberately false post as part of her attempts to uncover who was behind the leaks.

Ms Rooney’s lawyers are also requesting that Ms Watt be added as an additional party to their claim that her private information was misused by Ms Vardy.

In a court document, Ms Rooney’s lawyers insisted that only excerpts of communication between Ms Vardy and Ms Watt have been provided, many of them heavily redacted and say that there has been a deliberate attempt not to hand everything. 

Ms Rooney’s lawyers maintain that seeing the redacted messages was a coincidence after they used an IT programme to read evidence they had been sent which exposed them. 

But they argued that from what they have received so far, it proves their case but now all of the evidence must be handed over for the matter to be decided fairly.

Ms Rooney’s lawyers claimed that Ms Watt has not provided the mobile phone she used at the time for examination, insisting that she dropped it in the North Sea while on a family holiday just days after being ordered to hand it over by a High Court judge.

Ms Vardy has also insisted that all WhatsApp audio and images exchanged with Ms Watt were ‘accidentally lost’ not just from her phone but all backups as she was attempting to send them to her solicitors.

Ms Rooney’s lawyers are also demanding all communication between Ms Vardy and Ms Watt and a number of journalists at The Sun as well as full disclosure of any payments made to them by the newspaper.

At the same time, Ms Vardy’s legal team are also demanding full disclosure of communication between Ms Rooney and football agent Paul Stretford plus a number of other people who they maintain were involved in assisting or advising her over the ‘sting operation.’

The document submitted by Ms Rooney’s lawyers said: ‘From the outset, Mrs Vardy has always claimed that neither she nor Ms Watt were involved in the leaking of private information from Mrs Rooney’s Instagram account. The recent disclosure has shown that this is emphatically not the case.’

The feud between the two women erupted after Ms Rooney publicly claimed her fellow footballer’s wife shared fake stories she had posted on her personal Instagram with the paper.

She declared that she eventually narrowed down who could see them until they were only accessible to Ms Vardy, who denied the allegations and started libel proceedings against her.

A full trial is scheduled for May and is expected to cost both women a combined £1 million in legal fees.

Ms Rooney’s lawyers maintain that seeing the redacted messages was a coincidence after they used an IT programme to read evidence they had been sent which exposed them.  

Demanding that all communication evidence be handed over to them, Ms Rooney’s lawyers argued: ‘They plainly demonstrate that (a) Ms Watt was regularly accessing and monitoring Mrs Rooney’s Private Instagram Account using Mrs Vardy’s Private Instagram Account for the purpose, and Mrs Vardy was well aware and approved of this; (b) Mrs Vardy had a habitual pattern of leaking private information (about Mrs Rooney).’

The messages uncovered by Ms Rooney’s legal team were also said to challenge earlier denials by Ms Vardy that she did not help to orchestrate a picture of the two and other WAGS outside a St Petersburg restaurant during the 2018 World Cup that appeared in The Sun.

The court heard a message exchange between Ms Vardy and Ms Watt shows them coordinating the photo without the rest of the group being aware of it.

Ms Rooney’s legal team also claimed in court documents that full disclosure of evidence will also prove that Ms Vardy was the author of The Sun’s Secret Wag column and was also behind the leaking of sensitive information about one high profile England footballer who it was alleged in the newspaper article, had a secret love child.

This is not the first war of words between the pair. In 2019, Ms Vardy gave a blistering interview to the Daily Mail in which she said arguing with Ms Rooney was ‘as pointless as arguing with a pigeon’. 

She also revealed the contents of their phone call just moments after Ms Rooney suggested she had been responsible for leaking stories. 

Recalling the conversation, she said: ‘I said to her: ‘Coleen, what on earth have you done?”

‘It was not an easy phone call. She said to me: ‘I’m not pointing the finger’ and I said: ‘You have just annihilated me in public and hung me out to dry. The whole world hates me!’

‘I thought she was my friend but she completely annihilated me. She said: ‘You know, I always really liked you, which makes it harder.”

Asked if she argued with Ms Rooney, Ms Vardy replied: ‘That would be like arguing with a pigeon. You can tell it that you are right and it is wrong, but it’s still going to s*** in your hair.’ 

The hearing continues.