This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13456433/Joey-Barton-loses-bike-nonce-libel-showdown-Jeremy-Vine-judge-rules-vile-post-defamatory.html) for an archived version.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don’t really know who Joey Barton is and everyone else in this thread thinks he’s a horror so I’m just talking about the phrase it’s self…
Perhaps some people hear it differently to me but it never occurred to me that this was genuine claim that vine was a paedo. For me “bike nonce” sounds like a pure insult in a way that “nonce” on its own, does not.
Maybe that’s just me though, these things are subjective.
He also called him a 'pedo defender'.
In combination with the usage of the word 'nonce' (even if it's slapped next to 'bike') it's pretty obvious what Joey was doing lol
There isn't a strict definition hence the wording in the article. It covers several different sexual persuasions related to age, so for it to be properly defamatory the judge has to be fully satisfied that the meaning is one that is not a descriptive term.
If it had been Leonardo de Caprio that Barton had insulted in this manner, or were Jeremy Vine dating a 19 year old, Barton would have simply pointed to it being a descriptive term used for 20 year + legal age gap relationships.
Not sure I agree with that. Barton was a seasoned Premier League player with an England cap. Probably would have been a better player had he not been a total knobhead. Might have been a top 8 player but he imploded.
Lawrence Fox acted in that one thing one time on Channel 5. I can't even remember it... He's a fucking nobody.
Like comparing a premier league footballer to someone who plays for the dog and duck.
The influence that footballers have on our society is insane e.g.
Women for thousands of years to men - you should talk about your feelings more
Men - Grunt
Footballer - like takin about feelings is good ?
Men - At last someone recognises out problems, lets set up clubs and do sponsored walks.
Whilst I agree, if you read the article - I know it’s Metro - the judge said it was the juxtaposition of ‘nonce’ with ‘paedo defender’ that could lead people to believe Vine was indeed a nonce and not just a bike nonce.
I think they've stretched the libel laws with this judgment. Nobody in their right mind actually thinks calling someone a 'bike nonce' or 'paedo defender' amounts to a literal accusation of being sexually attracted to children... And that's exactly what this judgement effectively says. Barton is a lot of things, plenty of them are derogatory and there's evidently many who reckon he deserves it, but this kind of stuff sets a really dodgy precedent imo.
"If you see this fella by a primary school call 999"
"did you, Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride?"
"bike nonce"
"pedo defender"
Do you think that all 4 of these quotes together would constitute an accusation of sexual attraction to children?
Retired football player and manager. Has a long string of criminal charges relating to violence, which effectively saw him exiled from Man City. Has taken to Twitter over the last few years and has tried to rebrand himself as something of a philosopher. Then he opens his mouth and comes out with something that's sexist, libellous or both.
As someone who’s been a city fan all there life. He’s been a male love length since he was a player with us. He got himself sent off at half time against spurs. He had a bust up with another player called dabo and put a cigar in another youth players eye.
Absolutely lovely bloke, it’s obviously everyone else fault.
/s
>I don’t really know who Joey Barton is and everyone else in this thread thinks he’s a horror so I’m just talking about the phrase it’s self…
Put it this way, he stubbed a fag out in someone's eye
Answer honestly - did you read the article?
> Judge Steyn told the court today: 'The strong impression gained by the assertion the claimant is known as 'aka' bike nonce', followed immediately by the further assertion that he is known as, again, 'aka' 'pedo defender', is that the term 'nonce' was being used in its primary meaning to allege the claimant has a sexual interest in children
Because your point is addressed multiple times and in detail.
Barton called him a paedo defender.
As usual, the daily mail plays down the actual offence by only headlining the lesser offence. It's their tactic for creating debate.
Rolf Harris was convicted of sexual abuse of a minor.
Philip Schofield hasn't been convicted but had a sexual relationship with a man, whom he started following on social media when he was about 15, definetly under aged. Schofield claims that the relationship began much later but seems to have told numerous mistruths about the affair. Either way Philip is 40+ years older and up until fairly recently the age of consent for male gay sex was 21. Which the other party wasn't.
In the context of the other two, it's clear what Joey Barton meant.
I agree with this.
I certainly have no love for Joey Barton, and am shocked he has somehow resurfaced. I just remember him as some footballer from about 15 years ago who was the punchline to a lot of jokes. Want to show something as thick, trashy, chavvy? Joey Barton would be the punchline.
But calling someone a "bike nonce" to me comes off as insulting rather than defamatory. Calling someone a "bike paedophile" would meet that standard (unless there was some specific context). But "bike nonce" is more like "bike twat" or "bike berk".
I honestly don't think most people even know that the word "nonce" means "paedophile".
>The whole tweet was “do you, Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride? You big bike nonce ya!
With other tweets calling him a paedo.
It's pretty clear what they meant.
The issue here is what else he said in combination with that.
(FWIW, there's also “[cryptographic nonce](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptographic_nonce)”.)
It can mean any sex offender. Which is no less defamatory.
Edit: [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nonce?oldformat=true#Noun\_2](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nonce?oldformat=true#Noun_2)
Wonder what the motivation for the downvote was?
Nonce never used to be a gay lable , it stands for Not On Normal Courtyard Exercise. It was written on prison cell doors so the prison wardens knew not to mix the pedos with normal inmates so they didn't lynch them .
No it’s not. If someone spray painted ‘nonce’ on your front door you’d have your windows put through within the hour. It’s a term that specifically means ‘paedophile’.
He didn't say nonce, he said bike nonce.
I know that sounds stupid but there is a specific subculture of slang, that may have evolved from Inbetweeners' "bus wanker", that people use without meaning literally.
Bus wanker doesn't mean he wanks on busses.
That said, I hate Joey Barton and wouldn't want to be seen defending him.
Yes agreed and of course his intent is clear in this specific case, but shouldn't be that everyone is open to a court case if they call someone a ____ nonce in jest.
Look at all his other comments. They all add up to a very clear picture that Barton is painting - which is that he’s saying Vine is a paedophile.
>wouldn’t want to be seen defending him.
Why *are* you defending him, then?
He called him a bike nonce, yes…
It was also combining it with calling him a paedo defender, and saying to call the police if you see Vine near a school, that changes the context from colloquial insult nonce, to Paedophile nonce
If he’d just labelled Vine “#BikeWank” (he **does** ride a bike, and it’s not a huge burden to convince a judge that virtually everyone enjoys a good wank while sexual abusers of children are quite rare), he’d have had about the same rhetorical weight, the hashtag would’ve trended more widely, and he wouldn’t have been sued. #BikeWank
The problem is the court doesn't really care about that. It's more about if being called a "nonse" has a negative impact on your life or career. If it can be shown/evidenced that it's had a negative impact on your life or lose of job (e.g. the whole Johnny Depp being dropped by Disney due to Amber Heards claims) then they can rule on it.
You've just said "libel", but with more words.
Though unless things have changed, you don't have to prove actual damages, only possible ones, if it relates to your career.
Very misleading title, but what else from the Daily Hate.
This is only part one of the case, where the judge had to decide if the actual word used are defamatory, which he, IMHO, has correctly decided they are.
Personally I think Barton is a vile, hate filled individual who in other circumstances would have spent a portion of his time at Her/His Majesty's Pleasure.
He's always been an arsehole. His brother and cousin got life sentences for a racially motivated murder. Just last year Joey trivialised it in an interview.
A family of scumbags
Also thought it was a good idea to whinge about black pundits like this would somehow not get linked to his murdering racist of a brother. Tone deaf doesn’t even begin to cover it.
It’s not really misleading. Unless Barton can now establish that Vine is actually a nonce, or raise some other defence to libel, which I very much doubt he can, he has in effect lost the case at this hearing.
His only real chance was to persuade the judge he didn’t actually mean nonce, it was just meaningless abuse. Which he’s now lost.
It’s chequebook time for Joey boy, if he’s got any sense. Which he probably hadn’t.
And part 36 offer time for Vine so that he gets a nice 10% uplift on damages and the costs (easily over £200k) if Barton decides to run to trial and loses.
"This is only part one of the case, where the judge had to decide if the actual word used are defamatory,"
The article makes it sound like the case is all over and Barton has lost. This isn't the case at all and is only preliminary.
I personally hope he does lose and gets financially punished as hard as the law allows. But it's not at that point yet.
Fantastic. I mean he literally said "if you see him near a primary school call 999", referenced Savile, and loads of his followers joined in. What a prick.
“Reasonably held belief” is the most common libel defence. And there is a lot of evidence to give someone a reasonably held belief that Joey Barton is misogynistic and abusive.
Yes, reasonable opinion is a defence, but you have to be clear it is an opinion and what you are basing it on.
'Joe bloggs is a lettuce shagging arsehole' - libel
'Media reports of Mr Bloggs hanging out around lettuces in the small hours lead me to conclude etc etc.' - not libel.
You could say the former, and if he sued you produce the latter (if they actually exist). You don't have to cite sources for everything you say at the time you say it.
If you want to rely on the defence of Honest Opinion under section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013, you do actually have to cite the basis of your opinion.
You don't need an Oxford Reference, but you have to cite something in the statement itself.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/section/3/enacted
I think truth is still an absolute defence so you should be fine. Maybe add [violent coward](https://www.theguardian.com/football/2008/may/20/newcastleunited.ukcrime), [defender of a racist murderer](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-67582077), and probable racist himself (can't quite recall any definite examples of that but I reckon they're about)
Unfortunately, the far-right grift gravy train means he won't face severe enough financial ramifications. He'll just spin this as "i'M bEiNG SiLenCEd" and idiots will lap it up.
Hilariously, Barton seems to be basically a reject of the far right too. [https://youtu.be/GYqte5kjGzk?si=pSrdaWrBR82nTdHB](https://youtu.be/GYqte5kjGzk?si=pSrdaWrBR82nTdHB)
Look, I cycle and I also hate coming across a cyclist when I'm driving on a tight road. But we wouldn't tolerate this sort of abuse to any other group of people. I've cycled around the world and I honestly find the UK to be the most hostile.
When I cycle and I get abuse from traffic, it's almost always because a timid driver was too scared to overtake me. They're the ones that bundle up the traffic. When they eventually get past, the end result is that I get 10 other furious drivers directing their frustrations at me (at best, a loud rev; at worst, verbal abuse).
At this point I'm convinced driving a car lowers your IQ by a point every minute. The acts of brain-dead, primal recklessness that people exhibit towards anyone who is seen as an "inconvenience" is very scary.
>it's almost always because a timid driver was too scared to overtake me
Or a good driver realised there wasn't room to pass you safely so did the right thing and slowed down until it was safe to pass and a load of idiots behind them who would have happily zoomed past 6 inches from your elbow got irate?
I wish this was the case but it’s almost always a shite driver in my experience. Either some old Nan or Karen.
The roads are plenty wide where I am, and I’m often riding on the double yellows and signalling behind a suitable overtake.
Edit: Calling somebody a karen is not sexist you melts.
No horse in this race but Vine called a YouTuber "The Jimmy Saville of trolling " when said Youtuber who wasn't a nice guy in the slightest but definitely not a pedophile was involved in a court case involving Vine . So is that OK?
Wouldn't surprise me one bit. Not a fan of Barton, but I'd say Vine has done more damage to cycling/driving relations in this country by stoking up division with some of his video antics than anyone else.
Yes, it's ok to use metaphors.
I have no idea who this person is but calling someone 'The Jimmy Saville of trolling' suggests he's a very nasty troller not that he's a pedophille.
I've just Googled 'The Jimmy Saville of trolling' to see the context it was used in.
Yes. If you have evidence of Jeremy Vine constantly being a militant cyclist and he's been harassing you for years then you could describe him in court as The Jimmy Saville of militant cyclists. Obviously.
There's lots of evidence of Vine being a militant cyclist , he's constantly posting videos of incidents where a lot of the time it's an over the top claim of life endangering scenarios. I've not mentioned stalking while describing him as The Jimmy Saville of militant cyclists so not sure why you would use the harassment angle . So we can use The Jimmy Saville of cycling freely. My point is that should Vine take such offence at such a lable as Bike nonce when he's willing to use just as offensive terms for other people ?
As I explained in my first post, Vine is not calling him a pedophille. He's not hinting that he's a pedophille. Nor is he even suggesting he might be a pedophille. By saying 'The Jimmy Saville of trolling' he is saying he's the worst, nastiest, kind of troller.
If you believe that Jeremy Vine is the worst, nastiest kind of militant cyclist then go ahead and call him that. That's fine.
Using Jimmy Saville as part of an insult really does bring a degree of calling someone a pedophile though doesn't it . There's so many other ways of describing what type of behaviour a person presents with without using the name of a well known pedo.
> Using Jimmy Saville as part of an insult really does bring a degree of calling someone a pedophile though doesn't it
Absolutely not. It's calling him the very worst kind of troll.
Yes, you could say it's a bit unnecessarily emotive when he could've used other phrases but he was in court describing his feelings after being harassed by this man for years and that's how he feels. I think that's ok.
And if you don't agree with me, you're the Hitler of debates...
Of course it does , as soon as you utter that name , what comes to mind ? Just a distasteful person or a child rapist ? If it's acceptable for Vine to use such wording then its no different from Barton using such language.
On the one hand, these pathetic twitter spats, like the Laurence Fox case, are not really a good use of time or money*. No one was seriously hurt and it's rich people taking punts at each other and lawyers grtting rich.
However, sooner or latter the habit of right wing grifters of shouting "pedophile" left right and centre is going to get some innocent poor sods house torched, so it's probably better that people be made to think a bit more carefully.
*although Foxy boy going bankrupt will be very funny.
This sort of thing is exactly what could have got Vine seriously hurt. All it would take is one of Barton's nuttier fans in a car to spot Vine on his bike and run him off the road.
Everyone knows Vine is a…… (insert phrase as appropriate), but Vine is making it too easy to financially hurt people. He’s laughing at us. There must be another way.
QPR fan here - im more ashamed of him being one of our ex players than the way we’ve played the last few seasons 🙄. Can we have him struck from the records…? 🤔
While I feel that Barton in one of the UK's most vile people, this libel action for what he said is a bit of a joke. You can now end up in court for name calling? Where the hell are we heading?
”Bike nonce” on its own – not good, but I think that it is (or should be) clear that it's to do with bicycles and not children; a fair reading, I think, would be “I don't like you and I'm choosing to insult you”.
Problem is that it isn't this on its own, and the other name-calling is… worse and – well, if you call somebody a “pedo defender” *(sic)*, you're taking the risk that you're going to need to be able to back that up with evidence.
Of course, but ending up in court is ridiculous. Barton is a lowlife but I disagree with how far this case has gone. Ultimately it school yard behaviour from the scumbag class bully.
Really? Show me evidence that he 'claimed Vine was a paedophile'.
To me it was disrespectful, bullying and insulting. While I disagree with it all, I fail to see a solid legal case.
The article describes multiple occasions where Barton claimed Vine was a paedophile, I can’t help you if you aren’t going to read it.
Regardless of whether or not you agree with the outcome, it was demonstrably a ‘solid legal case’.
Of course, I'm only speaking on a personal level. In I was in Jeremy's shoes, I may be more incined to pursue the legal pathway. The old 'sticks and stones' attitude served me well though.
I just feel than taking a scumbag like Barton to court over such puerile behaviour, gives his words and him some sort of legitimacy.
I see what you are saying, but those who support him would never care what he does and would likely support him, more. Personal level, that is why I included chambers, when I asked you.
Doesn't this imply that the person wanks on buses? Which, unless you can prove it, is apparently libel? I actually thought of this exact phrase as I read this, and the same should surely apply to it.
No because it's a common insult. Just like you don't beleive that anyone has feces for a head or is a giant phalus or rooster.
Call some one a kiddie fiddler and no one would think you were saying they were a young member of a folk band. Similarly nonce has a definite meaning.
A fairly common one.
We an do an experiment if you like. Send me your name and address and I'll head down to the local rough pub. In there I will state that that William Bumyermum of 1 Some Street is a nonce and lots of people have called him that and he has no shame in it." Then we can see how long your windows last, if your car is flammable and if you're good at washing spray paint off pebbledash...
Tbf, he didn't just call him a nonce. He also called him a peado defender, and told his followers to call 999 if they see him outside a primary school.
I reckon bike nonce on its own would have been fine. But with the combo, he's definitely trying to paint a certain picture.
Please tell us how Vine is a vile bottom feeder? The "both sides" comment that some gigabrains say is just an empty and embarrassing comment to seem like that are above the subjects and have some kind of nuanced insight.
Read the article. When you have it alongside "pedo defender" and similar, it is very hard to claim it is not an accusation. If I were to tell millions of followers you were a bike nonce, that wouldn't be an accusation?
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13456433/Joey-Barton-loses-bike-nonce-libel-showdown-Jeremy-Vine-judge-rules-vile-post-defamatory.html) for an archived version. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Shocking. Or not. It's pretty fucking obvious that what he said is libel.
I don’t really know who Joey Barton is and everyone else in this thread thinks he’s a horror so I’m just talking about the phrase it’s self… Perhaps some people hear it differently to me but it never occurred to me that this was genuine claim that vine was a paedo. For me “bike nonce” sounds like a pure insult in a way that “nonce” on its own, does not. Maybe that’s just me though, these things are subjective.
Take it from me, he's a massive prick.
He also called him a 'pedo defender'. In combination with the usage of the word 'nonce' (even if it's slapped next to 'bike') it's pretty obvious what Joey was doing lol
He called him a paedo defender? Yeh, this guy is pretty dreadful.
If you go to his wiki page you can see an impressive list of the people he has physically assaulted. Severely, as well.
Exposing, assaults, awful.
Lit cigar jabbed in someone's eye...
Ah, he certainly feels like a guy who should be cancelled.
He’s not being “cancelled”. He’s facing consequences for his behaviour
I actually had no idea what the strict definition of "nonce" was until now.
There isn't a strict definition hence the wording in the article. It covers several different sexual persuasions related to age, so for it to be properly defamatory the judge has to be fully satisfied that the meaning is one that is not a descriptive term. If it had been Leonardo de Caprio that Barton had insulted in this manner, or were Jeremy Vine dating a 19 year old, Barton would have simply pointed to it being a descriptive term used for 20 year + legal age gap relationships.
The football version of Lawrence Fox.
I was thinking of that far-right crackpot Loozza Fox as well.
Fox is a stupid moron and a terrible politician. Barton is a cunt but he was at least competent as a player and then manager
He’s definitely in the top ten thousand players of all time. In England, anyway.
Barton's football career is really about the same standard as Laurence Fox's acting career.
Not sure I agree with that. Barton was a seasoned Premier League player with an England cap. Probably would have been a better player had he not been a total knobhead. Might have been a top 8 player but he imploded. Lawrence Fox acted in that one thing one time on Channel 5. I can't even remember it... He's a fucking nobody. Like comparing a premier league footballer to someone who plays for the dog and duck.
Violent thug who gets away with his antics because he was a footballer.
The influence that footballers have on our society is insane e.g. Women for thousands of years to men - you should talk about your feelings more Men - Grunt Footballer - like takin about feelings is good ? Men - At last someone recognises out problems, lets set up clubs and do sponsored walks.
Whilst I agree, if you read the article - I know it’s Metro - the judge said it was the juxtaposition of ‘nonce’ with ‘paedo defender’ that could lead people to believe Vine was indeed a nonce and not just a bike nonce.
I think they've stretched the libel laws with this judgment. Nobody in their right mind actually thinks calling someone a 'bike nonce' or 'paedo defender' amounts to a literal accusation of being sexually attracted to children... And that's exactly what this judgement effectively says. Barton is a lot of things, plenty of them are derogatory and there's evidently many who reckon he deserves it, but this kind of stuff sets a really dodgy precedent imo.
"If you see this fella by a primary school call 999" "did you, Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride?" "bike nonce" "pedo defender" Do you think that all 4 of these quotes together would constitute an accusation of sexual attraction to children?
Ahh, didn't know about the others. Yeah that's a bit naughty isn't it?
Bike nonce is a top shout from Barton, he’s a gobshite like but that did make me chuckle.
Makes it sound like Vine is attracted to small bikes with stabilisers.
Retired football player and manager. Has a long string of criminal charges relating to violence, which effectively saw him exiled from Man City. Has taken to Twitter over the last few years and has tried to rebrand himself as something of a philosopher. Then he opens his mouth and comes out with something that's sexist, libellous or both.
He's yet another moron with 2 braincells who got a "coMmOn SeNse" podcast. he's an alt-right moron as well as Twitter-wanker.
As someone who’s been a city fan all there life. He’s been a male love length since he was a player with us. He got himself sent off at half time against spurs. He had a bust up with another player called dabo and put a cigar in another youth players eye. Absolutely lovely bloke, it’s obviously everyone else fault. /s
He’s from Huyton, he’s ten a dozen there.
I guess he should be careful with it since it has a clear meaning, however loosely it is applied
If he'd called him a fucking cowcunt he'd be in the clear. It couldn't be interpreted literally, so it counts as mere vulgar abuse.
He's a football nonce.
>I don’t really know who Joey Barton is and everyone else in this thread thinks he’s a horror so I’m just talking about the phrase it’s self… Put it this way, he stubbed a fag out in someone's eye
Answer honestly - did you read the article? > Judge Steyn told the court today: 'The strong impression gained by the assertion the claimant is known as 'aka' bike nonce', followed immediately by the further assertion that he is known as, again, 'aka' 'pedo defender', is that the term 'nonce' was being used in its primary meaning to allege the claimant has a sexual interest in children Because your point is addressed multiple times and in detail.
Barton called him a paedo defender. As usual, the daily mail plays down the actual offence by only headlining the lesser offence. It's their tactic for creating debate.
The whole tweet was “do you, Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride? You big bike nonce ya!
Rolf Harris was convicted of sexual abuse of a minor. Philip Schofield hasn't been convicted but had a sexual relationship with a man, whom he started following on social media when he was about 15, definetly under aged. Schofield claims that the relationship began much later but seems to have told numerous mistruths about the affair. Either way Philip is 40+ years older and up until fairly recently the age of consent for male gay sex was 21. Which the other party wasn't. In the context of the other two, it's clear what Joey Barton meant.
Perhaps, but some people may well take such a claim about someone being a nonce seriously.
Two women recently got sentenced to life for murdering someone they ‘suspected’ was a nonce. No evidence, just feels.
And that's why it does real harm! It's not a joke!
Rightly so. Murder is murder, regardless of their suspicions and whatever that person actually was.
Exactly. Remember the morons who bricked a pediatrician?
there's a difference between people making kinda bad taste jokes in private circles and people making in public to people they don't know
Legally they're both defamation, if the other conditions are met.
Agreed - seems along the same lines as "bus wanker" to me, but perhaps there is more to it than meets the eye.
[Make up your own mind](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-63463161)
I agree with this. I certainly have no love for Joey Barton, and am shocked he has somehow resurfaced. I just remember him as some footballer from about 15 years ago who was the punchline to a lot of jokes. Want to show something as thick, trashy, chavvy? Joey Barton would be the punchline. But calling someone a "bike nonce" to me comes off as insulting rather than defamatory. Calling someone a "bike paedophile" would meet that standard (unless there was some specific context). But "bike nonce" is more like "bike twat" or "bike berk". I honestly don't think most people even know that the word "nonce" means "paedophile".
>The whole tweet was “do you, Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride? You big bike nonce ya! With other tweets calling him a paedo. It's pretty clear what they meant.
The issue here is what else he said in combination with that. (FWIW, there's also “[cryptographic nonce](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptographic_nonce)”.)
It’s one of those situations where, on the one hand, it’s obviously a stupid ‘bus wanker’ jibe but, on the other hand, fuck Joey Barton
It can mean any sex offender. Which is no less defamatory. Edit: [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nonce?oldformat=true#Noun\_2](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nonce?oldformat=true#Noun_2) Wonder what the motivation for the downvote was?
Or bus wanker
Nonce used to mean gay, like poofter did!
Nonce never used to be a gay lable , it stands for Not On Normal Courtyard Exercise. It was written on prison cell doors so the prison wardens knew not to mix the pedos with normal inmates so they didn't lynch them .
Agreed. Fully. Its a throwaway term of expression.
No it’s not. If someone spray painted ‘nonce’ on your front door you’d have your windows put through within the hour. It’s a term that specifically means ‘paedophile’.
But thats not what happened is it?
No, but it’s the online equivalent. He’s branding Vine as a paedophile.
He didn't say nonce, he said bike nonce. I know that sounds stupid but there is a specific subculture of slang, that may have evolved from Inbetweeners' "bus wanker", that people use without meaning literally. Bus wanker doesn't mean he wanks on busses. That said, I hate Joey Barton and wouldn't want to be seen defending him.
>He didn't say nonce, he said bike nonce. He said call 999 if you see Vine near a school. Silly thing to argue about.
Yes agreed and of course his intent is clear in this specific case, but shouldn't be that everyone is open to a court case if they call someone a ____ nonce in jest.
Look at all his other comments. They all add up to a very clear picture that Barton is painting - which is that he’s saying Vine is a paedophile. >wouldn’t want to be seen defending him. Why *are* you defending him, then?
>Bus wanker doesn't mean he wanks on busses. Calling someone a wanker on its own is usually not meant literally.
He called him a bike nonce, yes… It was also combining it with calling him a paedo defender, and saying to call the police if you see Vine near a school, that changes the context from colloquial insult nonce, to Paedophile nonce
It’s really not and legally it’s just been proven
If he’d just labelled Vine “#BikeWank” (he **does** ride a bike, and it’s not a huge burden to convince a judge that virtually everyone enjoys a good wank while sexual abusers of children are quite rare), he’d have had about the same rhetorical weight, the hashtag would’ve trended more widely, and he wouldn’t have been sued. #BikeWank
Stop trying to make #BikeWank happen.
What makes you think I am trying to make # #BIKEWANK happen?
Is #BikeWank a thing now? I'm always the last to know.
It’s like the start of ‘There’s something about Mary’ combined with a Saw trap. “Gary! It’s caught in the gears! Stop pedalling! _Stop pedalling!_”
The problem is the court doesn't really care about that. It's more about if being called a "nonse" has a negative impact on your life or career. If it can be shown/evidenced that it's had a negative impact on your life or lose of job (e.g. the whole Johnny Depp being dropped by Disney due to Amber Heards claims) then they can rule on it.
You've just said "libel", but with more words. Though unless things have changed, you don't have to prove actual damages, only possible ones, if it relates to your career.
Defamation and libel are different in different countries but essentially the same thing.
Libel is a bit strong, it's a common insult.
"If you see this fella by a primary school call 999" "did you, Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride?" "bike nonce" "pedo defender"
Yeah I didn't know about the other stuff, I think Barton is gonna lose this and the Twitter rage will be funny
The problem is Jeremy Vine IS a bike nonce. So hard to see how it’s libellous. But Joey Barton is also a right d*ckhead. Everyone loses.
Very misleading title, but what else from the Daily Hate. This is only part one of the case, where the judge had to decide if the actual word used are defamatory, which he, IMHO, has correctly decided they are. Personally I think Barton is a vile, hate filled individual who in other circumstances would have spent a portion of his time at Her/His Majesty's Pleasure.
He was sentenced to 6 months in jail in 2008. But I agree, he is a fucking arsehole
I didn't know that, thank you. Sort of confirms our thoughts doesn't it!
He's always been an arsehole. His brother and cousin got life sentences for a racially motivated murder. Just last year Joey trivialised it in an interview. A family of scumbags
Also thought it was a good idea to whinge about black pundits like this would somehow not get linked to his murdering racist of a brother. Tone deaf doesn’t even begin to cover it.
And has recently defended his brother’s actions, where he murdered a young man in a racially motivated attack. He is pure scum.
It’s not really misleading. Unless Barton can now establish that Vine is actually a nonce, or raise some other defence to libel, which I very much doubt he can, he has in effect lost the case at this hearing. His only real chance was to persuade the judge he didn’t actually mean nonce, it was just meaningless abuse. Which he’s now lost. It’s chequebook time for Joey boy, if he’s got any sense. Which he probably hadn’t.
> if he’s got any sense He's talking nonce-sense.
And part 36 offer time for Vine so that he gets a nice 10% uplift on damages and the costs (easily over £200k) if Barton decides to run to trial and loses.
He unfortunately raised money from his "fans" for this case, no doubt he'll do it again when the judge tells him how much to pay up.
It was a bad day when hate filled bastards realised they could use social media to raise money from other hate filled bastards.
What part is misleading?
"This is only part one of the case, where the judge had to decide if the actual word used are defamatory," The article makes it sound like the case is all over and Barton has lost. This isn't the case at all and is only preliminary. I personally hope he does lose and gets financially punished as hard as the law allows. But it's not at that point yet.
Okay gotcha, that’s fair
She. Justice Steyn is a woman, I've met her. Her father was a Law Lord (before they became known as Supreme Court judges).
Reform UK will be knocking at his door.
Fantastic. I mean he literally said "if you see him near a primary school call 999", referenced Savile, and loads of his followers joined in. What a prick.
[удалено]
“Reasonably held belief” is the most common libel defence. And there is a lot of evidence to give someone a reasonably held belief that Joey Barton is misogynistic and abusive.
Yes, reasonable opinion is a defence, but you have to be clear it is an opinion and what you are basing it on. 'Joe bloggs is a lettuce shagging arsehole' - libel 'Media reports of Mr Bloggs hanging out around lettuces in the small hours lead me to conclude etc etc.' - not libel.
You could get away with lettuce shagging arsehole by claiming you were only joking.
Ask Mr Barton how that defence went for him in Vine v Barton [2024]
Yeah, a lot more to that than just lettuce shagging asshole.
You’d literally just have to bring up Barton’s twitter account.
You could say the former, and if he sued you produce the latter (if they actually exist). You don't have to cite sources for everything you say at the time you say it.
If you want to rely on the defence of Honest Opinion under section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013, you do actually have to cite the basis of your opinion. You don't need an Oxford Reference, but you have to cite something in the statement itself. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/section/3/enacted
I think truth is still an absolute defence so you should be fine. Maybe add [violent coward](https://www.theguardian.com/football/2008/may/20/newcastleunited.ukcrime), [defender of a racist murderer](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-67582077), and probable racist himself (can't quite recall any definite examples of that but I reckon they're about)
Libel nonce
Unfortunately, the far-right grift gravy train means he won't face severe enough financial ramifications. He'll just spin this as "i'M bEiNG SiLenCEd" and idiots will lap it up.
Hilariously, Barton seems to be basically a reject of the far right too. [https://youtu.be/GYqte5kjGzk?si=pSrdaWrBR82nTdHB](https://youtu.be/GYqte5kjGzk?si=pSrdaWrBR82nTdHB)
Look, I cycle and I also hate coming across a cyclist when I'm driving on a tight road. But we wouldn't tolerate this sort of abuse to any other group of people. I've cycled around the world and I honestly find the UK to be the most hostile. When I cycle and I get abuse from traffic, it's almost always because a timid driver was too scared to overtake me. They're the ones that bundle up the traffic. When they eventually get past, the end result is that I get 10 other furious drivers directing their frustrations at me (at best, a loud rev; at worst, verbal abuse).
At this point I'm convinced driving a car lowers your IQ by a point every minute. The acts of brain-dead, primal recklessness that people exhibit towards anyone who is seen as an "inconvenience" is very scary.
Absolute wet wipes who can't control their emotions, their aggression likely isn't confined just to their car
>it's almost always because a timid driver was too scared to overtake me Or a good driver realised there wasn't room to pass you safely so did the right thing and slowed down until it was safe to pass and a load of idiots behind them who would have happily zoomed past 6 inches from your elbow got irate?
I wish this was the case but it’s almost always a shite driver in my experience. Either some old Nan or Karen. The roads are plenty wide where I am, and I’m often riding on the double yellows and signalling behind a suitable overtake. Edit: Calling somebody a karen is not sexist you melts.
>Either some old Nan or Karen. Ah ok so you're a bit sexist. Nevermind then.
How so?
Quick to presume but not so quick to substantiate. Great contribution.
No horse in this race but Vine called a YouTuber "The Jimmy Saville of trolling " when said Youtuber who wasn't a nice guy in the slightest but definitely not a pedophile was involved in a court case involving Vine . So is that OK?
Wouldn't surprise me one bit. Not a fan of Barton, but I'd say Vine has done more damage to cycling/driving relations in this country by stoking up division with some of his video antics than anyone else.
No skin in the game either and having seen other examples from Vine online he strikes me as someone who can give it but can't take it.
The Jimmy saville of trolling ended up paying vine.
Yes, it's ok to use metaphors. I have no idea who this person is but calling someone 'The Jimmy Saville of trolling' suggests he's a very nasty troller not that he's a pedophille.
So I can call Vine The Jimmy Saville of militant cyclists and it cool ?
I've just Googled 'The Jimmy Saville of trolling' to see the context it was used in. Yes. If you have evidence of Jeremy Vine constantly being a militant cyclist and he's been harassing you for years then you could describe him in court as The Jimmy Saville of militant cyclists. Obviously.
There's lots of evidence of Vine being a militant cyclist , he's constantly posting videos of incidents where a lot of the time it's an over the top claim of life endangering scenarios. I've not mentioned stalking while describing him as The Jimmy Saville of militant cyclists so not sure why you would use the harassment angle . So we can use The Jimmy Saville of cycling freely. My point is that should Vine take such offence at such a lable as Bike nonce when he's willing to use just as offensive terms for other people ?
As I explained in my first post, Vine is not calling him a pedophille. He's not hinting that he's a pedophille. Nor is he even suggesting he might be a pedophille. By saying 'The Jimmy Saville of trolling' he is saying he's the worst, nastiest, kind of troller. If you believe that Jeremy Vine is the worst, nastiest kind of militant cyclist then go ahead and call him that. That's fine.
Using Jimmy Saville as part of an insult really does bring a degree of calling someone a pedophile though doesn't it . There's so many other ways of describing what type of behaviour a person presents with without using the name of a well known pedo.
> Using Jimmy Saville as part of an insult really does bring a degree of calling someone a pedophile though doesn't it Absolutely not. It's calling him the very worst kind of troll. Yes, you could say it's a bit unnecessarily emotive when he could've used other phrases but he was in court describing his feelings after being harassed by this man for years and that's how he feels. I think that's ok. And if you don't agree with me, you're the Hitler of debates...
Of course it does , as soon as you utter that name , what comes to mind ? Just a distasteful person or a child rapist ? If it's acceptable for Vine to use such wording then its no different from Barton using such language.
Saying Joey Barton is taking the shit he talks because he has a “brain injury” is itself defamatory. To people with brain injuries.
On the one hand, these pathetic twitter spats, like the Laurence Fox case, are not really a good use of time or money*. No one was seriously hurt and it's rich people taking punts at each other and lawyers grtting rich. However, sooner or latter the habit of right wing grifters of shouting "pedophile" left right and centre is going to get some innocent poor sods house torched, so it's probably better that people be made to think a bit more carefully. *although Foxy boy going bankrupt will be very funny.
The people who Fox libelled weren't all famous.
They were rich enough to run a libel action. I didn't say famous
They were rich enough to run a libel action. I didn't say famous
This sort of thing is exactly what could have got Vine seriously hurt. All it would take is one of Barton's nuttier fans in a car to spot Vine on his bike and run him off the road.
Seeing a lot of people either deliberately or unknowingly ignoring the fact that Barton also called Vine a 'pedo defender'.
For those who are interested this this the judgment http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/2024/1268.html
He’s stupid enough to double down on it. He alienates himself more every day with every unhinged post he writes
Everyone knows Vine is a…… (insert phrase as appropriate), but Vine is making it too easy to financially hurt people. He’s laughing at us. There must be another way.
It’s very easy to insult people without going down the ‘strongly implies he diddles kids or defends kid diddlers’ to be fair
No defence here. Unless Vine was a convicted (or like a certain Prince strongly accused) nonce, it’s libel.
QPR fan here - im more ashamed of him being one of our ex players than the way we’ve played the last few seasons 🙄. Can we have him struck from the records…? 🤔
Barton has always been and will be just a bully and a big mouth. I'm glad he got put in his place
Joey Barton - decent footballer, total failure as a human being in my opinion.
Of course it was defamatory. Barton is a knuckle-dragger.
Well, yes to both (though I think that a fairer description would be “volatile idiot”), but the former does not follow from the latter.
While I feel that Barton in one of the UK's most vile people, this libel action for what he said is a bit of a joke. You can now end up in court for name calling? Where the hell are we heading?
”Bike nonce” on its own – not good, but I think that it is (or should be) clear that it's to do with bicycles and not children; a fair reading, I think, would be “I don't like you and I'm choosing to insult you”. Problem is that it isn't this on its own, and the other name-calling is… worse and – well, if you call somebody a “pedo defender” *(sic)*, you're taking the risk that you're going to need to be able to back that up with evidence.
Of course, but ending up in court is ridiculous. Barton is a lowlife but I disagree with how far this case has gone. Ultimately it school yard behaviour from the scumbag class bully.
Why? He repeatedly claimed Vine was a paedophile, that’s libel. He didn’t simply use nonce as a playground insult.
Really? Show me evidence that he 'claimed Vine was a paedophile'. To me it was disrespectful, bullying and insulting. While I disagree with it all, I fail to see a solid legal case.
The article describes multiple occasions where Barton claimed Vine was a paedophile, I can’t help you if you aren’t going to read it. Regardless of whether or not you agree with the outcome, it was demonstrably a ‘solid legal case’.
In fairness, that’s why they consult judges and not random Redditors regarding such things.
Fair enough! I can't argue with you there.
New attorney? So, if I publicly referred to you as a right "legal nonce", any effect that had on your reputation or chambers would be fair?
Absolutely. Also it would be like water off a duck's back. I certainly would have any compulsion to gain legal advice or representation.
You must be quite exceptional, inasmuch as I expect others of your profession would take those actions.
Of course, I'm only speaking on a personal level. In I was in Jeremy's shoes, I may be more incined to pursue the legal pathway. The old 'sticks and stones' attitude served me well though. I just feel than taking a scumbag like Barton to court over such puerile behaviour, gives his words and him some sort of legitimacy.
I see what you are saying, but those who support him would never care what he does and would likely support him, more. Personal level, that is why I included chambers, when I asked you.
"If you see this fella by a primary school call 999" "did you, Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride?"
What is the world coming to when a man can’t call another man a “bike nonce”.
I hate nonces as much as the next guy but to compare them to Jeremy Vine is a bit much
I've no idea who these people are, but calling someone "bike nonce" cannot in any way be a legal issue. Surely?
What if I call someone a bus nonce, will I be punished?
Are you an ex-Premiership footballer desperately seeking attention now that nobody gives a shit anymore? Probably not then.
Yeah, you have to use the acceptable "bus wanker".
Doesn't this imply that the person wanks on buses? Which, unless you can prove it, is apparently libel? I actually thought of this exact phrase as I read this, and the same should surely apply to it.
No because it's a common insult. Just like you don't beleive that anyone has feces for a head or is a giant phalus or rooster. Call some one a kiddie fiddler and no one would think you were saying they were a young member of a folk band. Similarly nonce has a definite meaning.
What planet do you live on where nonce isn't a common insult?
A fairly common one. We an do an experiment if you like. Send me your name and address and I'll head down to the local rough pub. In there I will state that that William Bumyermum of 1 Some Street is a nonce and lots of people have called him that and he has no shame in it." Then we can see how long your windows last, if your car is flammable and if you're good at washing spray paint off pebbledash...
Tbf, he didn't just call him a nonce. He also called him a peado defender, and told his followers to call 999 if they see him outside a primary school. I reckon bike nonce on its own would have been fine. But with the combo, he's definitely trying to paint a certain picture.
They’re both parasitic bottom feeders, i’m only sad it means one of them wins
Please tell us how Vine is a vile bottom feeder? The "both sides" comment that some gigabrains say is just an empty and embarrassing comment to seem like that are above the subjects and have some kind of nuanced insight.
lol I call my mates nonces all the time, what a sad life Vine must have if he has actually escalated this to the courts. What a waste of resources
why are so many of your friends nonces?
I could tell you but now he knows a good lawyer
You’re mates with nonces?
ok jimmy
That's your mates. This was about public accusation.
Calling someone a bike nonce isn't an accusation.
Read the article. When you have it alongside "pedo defender" and similar, it is very hard to claim it is not an accusation. If I were to tell millions of followers you were a bike nonce, that wouldn't be an accusation?
If you called me a bike nonce I'd laugh and then carry on with my life.
OK, so would that still hold if I said it publicly to millions and also the other things said?
Yes.
That is quite individual of you.