Individual claiming Manchester Arena bombing was staged ordered to pay £45,000 in damages

An individual who propagated claims that the Manchester Arena bombing was a fabricated event has been mandated to pay £45,000 in compensation. Richard Hall, a former TV producer, was ordered to pay £22,500 each to two survivors of the incident, which resulted in 22 fatalities. Martin Hibbert and his daughter, Eve, residents of Chorley, initiated legal action against Hall on grounds of harassment and were successful in their lawsuit last month. The bombing left Mr. Hibbert with a spinal cord injury, while Ms. Hibbert sustained severe brain damage. Hall asserted in court that his conduct, which involved recording Eve outside her residence, served the public interest in his capacity as a journalist. He further alleged that “millions of people” had “bought a lie” concerning the attack. In addition to the fatalities, hundreds sustained injuries during the assault when Salman Abedi detonated a homemade rucksack bomb within the venue’s foyer as thousands departed an Ariana Grande concert. Mrs. Justice Steyn chose not to grant aggravated damages. She characterized Hall’s narrative as “preposterous and untrue” yet acknowledged his continued conviction in its veracity. She noted that both the father and daughter were susceptible, and the harassment had been extended. Furthermore, she issued an injunction against Hall, intended to prevent future harassment of the Hibberts, and mandated him to cover 90% of their legal expenses. Mr. Hibbert, who currently relies on a wheelchair, was the nearest survivor to the perpetrator and sustained 22 shrapnel wounds. He became paralyzed from the waist down and experiences post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Ms. Hibbert, aged 14 when the attack occurred, endured substantial, lasting cognitive impairment due to the bombing. This has necessitated full-time care for the remainder of her life, leaving her unable to walk without assistance and afflicted by PTSD and depression. Outside the courthouse, Mr. Hibbert described Mr. Hall’s conduct as “oppressive and unacceptable.” He stated, “Freedom of expression provides protection for journalism, but Mr Hall has abused media freedom.” He continued, “He repeatedly published false allegations and dismissed the tragic reality which so many ordinary people have experienced and continue to live with. His abhorrent behaviour had to be challenged, not just for me and my family but for others too.” He further remarked that the ruling constitutes a “comprehensive victory” and expressed hope that it would pave the way for modifications to safeguard other individuals. Kerry Gillespie, representing Hudgell Solicitors, commented that numerous individuals believe they are at liberty to disseminate “harmful, unfounded allegations against others, especially those who have already suffered from tragedy,” but emphasized that this particular case has altered the situation. She affirmed, “Martin and Eve have set a precedent which will hopefully see more people who engage in this sort of behaviour challenged.” Outside the Royal Courts of Justice, Mr. Hall reiterated some of his assertions that the attack did not occur and contended that his trial was not equitable. He departed when questioned about offering an apology to the attack’s victims. Further reporting was provided by PA Media. For more content, listeners can access BBC Radio Lancashire on Sounds and engage with BBC Lancashire on Facebook, X, and Instagram. Story suggestions can also be submitted to northwest.newsonline@bbc.co.uk. This content is Copyright 2024 BBC. All rights reserved. The BBC disclaims responsibility for the material found on external websites. Information regarding their external linking policy is available.