Laurence Fox arrives at the High Court hand-in-hand with his girlfriend for the start of his libel trial

Laurence Fox has arrived at the High Court hand in hand with his girlfriend for the start of his libel battle against two people he called ‘paedophiles’ on X. 

The actor turned politician is being sued by former Stonewall trustee Simon Blake and drag artist Crystal over a row on social media in October 2020.

He was accompanied to today’s hearing by his new girlfriend Liz Barker, an American living in the UK . 

Mr Fox called Mr Blake and the former RuPaul’s Drag Race contestant, whose real name is Colin Seymour, ‘paedophiles’ in an exchange about a decision by Sainsbury’s to celebrate Black History Month.

The Lewis star – who founded the Reclaim Party – is counter-suing the pair and actress Nicola Thorp over tweets accusing him of racism.

Laurence Fox, seen arriving at the High Court with his new girlfriend, Liz Barker, is being sued over a row on X in October 2020

Mr Fox called Mr Blake and the former RuPaul ‘s Drag Race contestant, whose real name is Colin Seymour, ‘paedophiles’

Ms Barker – pictured – is an American living in the UK 

Mr Fox said at the time he would boycott Sainsbury’s, accusing it of promoting ‘racial segregation and discrimination’. 

A trial, expected to last a week, will see Mr Fox give evidence.

The 45-year-old previously made a bid for a jury to decide the case rather than a judge, which is now highly unusual in defamation cases.

However, Mr Justice Nicklin denied Mr Fox’s request in a ruling in May 2022.

Mr Fox’s barrister Alexandra Marzec had said a jury would be better at reaching fair verdicts ‘in light of the cultural and social context of this case’, adding that judges could be subject to ‘involuntary bias’.

Simon Blake (left), Nicola Thorp and Colin Seymour (right) arriving at the Royal Courts Of Justice this morning 

Mr Justice Nicklin said in his written judgment: ‘The defendant has not satisfied me that a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude that there was a real possibility that a judge trying this case alone would suffer from ‘involuntary bias’.

‘The fair-minded and informed observer must be taken to know that, faithful to his/her judicial oath, the judge in this case would be required to apply the law to the determination of the issues in the case, without fear or favour, affection or ill-will.’

Source: Read Full Article