The father of Paddy Jackson is to be awarded £100,000 in libel damages for false claims he tried to pay off the complainant at the rugby star’s rape trial, a judge in Belfast ruled today.
Peter Jackson secured the payout against reality TV personality Danielle Meagher over the lies she posted on social media.
Delivering judgment at the High Court in Belfast, Master Mark Harvey insisted there must be consequences for her “vile” allegations.
“There seems to be a sense in some quarters that there is an online cloak of invisibility leading people to type things on a keyboard they may never utter in person,” he said.
“Such cowardly online bile causes real-life hurt and upset to other people and damages their reputation.
“The message needs to be out there that when someone posts baseless and libelous accusations online, the repercussions can be very serious.”
Mr Jackson, 69, declared himself fully vindicated by the outcome in his seven-and-a-half-year defamation battle.
“My family and I have suffered a constant barrage, and it’s still not too late for an apology for these false accusations,” he said.
He sued Ms Meagher, also known as Danielle Collins, over the bogus allegations published on Twitter, now rebranded as X, back in April 2018.
Weeks previously former Ireland and Ulster rugby players Paddy Jackson, 33, and Stuart Olding, 32, had been unanimously acquitted of raping the same woman.
Both sportsmen denied any criminal wrongdoing throughout their high-profile trial in Belfast.
Judgment was previously obtained against Ms Meagher when she failed to enter an appearance in the case.
At a further hearing earlier this month Mr Jackson and his wife Gay revealed he has been left “crushed” by the fake claims he bribed a witness and attempted to bribe the complainant at their son’s trial.
The court heard he became so obsessed and paranoid that he suffered a stroke earlier this year while trawling the internet to check on Ms Meagher’s latest postings.
His loss of self-confidence since the tweets were published left him socially withdrawn and close to a recluse.
The retired sales manager described it as a pre-planned attack on his integrity.
“This was an absolute statement that I had been criminally dishonest,” he told the court.
“If the intent of the tweets was to get into my brain and into my heart that was achieved by the individual who put them out there.”
In his evidence Mr Jackson recalled being “knocked for six” when the tweets were posted just as the family were trying to help their son rebuild his rugby career following the not guilty verdict.
Ms Meagher later denied knowing anything about the tweets, making baseless claims the account was operated by a talent agency.
Despite her non-appearance, Mr Jackson said he would have loved to meet her face to face for an explanation.
He likened the ordeal and her approach to the case to a boxer taking repeated blows in the ring.
While he constantly trawled social media to see if the lies had been spread further, Gay Jackson told the court she tried to ignore the tweets by “burying her head in the sand”.
She said her husband became so paranoid about what others thought of him that he became increasingly distrustful and withdrew from social occasions.
She also described the shock when he suffered a stroke in August this year while in bed checking on any reviews about the defendant at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival.
“It crushed him and the confidence he had in himself,” Mrs Jackson stated.
“His whole confidence and self-esteem has been ripped from him because of what happened.”
Ruling on the scale of damages, Master Harvey called the tweets a personal attack aimed at trashing someone’s reputation with false accusations of criminal dishonesty.
He said it was rare to encounter such extensive efforts to track down a defendant, including serving notice on addresses in the USA and enlisting a private security firm to try to locate her in Dublin.
The judge referred to her as a “Z-list” celebrity whose conduct had been reprehensible.
“She departed for America and has been awkward and difficult throughout this process… she has simply brazened it out,” he said.
With no apology for retraction made, the level of pay-out must reflect vindication for Mr Jackson.
“There is no mitigation, there has only been aggravation, evasion and doubling down on the allegations by the defendant,” Master Harvey held.
“The lesson for the defendant, and frankly for those posting on social media platforms generally, is that virtual comments have real-life consequences.
“It is her egregious comments and subsequent conduct that have led to this.”
Awarding Mr Jackson £100,000 in damages plus legal costs, he recognised it may not be straightforward to recover compensation from someone living overseas.
Master Harvey added: “Even if this should prove to be a paper judgment, which would be a regrettable outcome, at the very least the plaintiff can say he brought his case, obtained judgment and he has been vindicated, which will hopefully avoid any repeat of such vile allegations.”
Mr Jackson’s solicitor, Kevin Winters, confirmed plans to pursue Ms Meagher for the libel damages.
“This is a damning judicial critique of the defendant’s response to our client’s litigation,” the lawyer said.
“Even at this very late stage and armed with a £100,000 judgment Mr Jackson is still prepared to give her a chance to apologise.”
Mr Winters added: “We will now proceed to take steps in two jurisdictions to enforce the ruling which transcends today’s case.
“It sends out a clear message to those who would embark upon what the court described as cowardly online bile: the legal process will catch up with you and you will be held to account.”