Rebekah Vardy breaks down in tears at 'Wagatha Christie' libel trial

Case at London's High court pits wives of top footballers against each other

Rebekah Vardy arrives at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, where she is suing Coleen Rooney for libel over a social media post. Reuters

Coleen Rooney is followed by photographers as she arrives at court on the second day of the trial. PA

Ms Rooney, 36, is the wife of former England footballer Wayne Rooney. EPA

Ms Vardy, 40, is the wife of Leicester City and ex-England footballer Jamie Vardy. PA

A court artist sketch of Ms Vardy giving evidence in what has become known as the 'Wagatha Christie' trial because of its origins in Ms Rooney's amateur detective efforts. PA

Wayne Rooney arrives at court. AFP

Coleen and Wayne Rooney, left, and Rebekah Vardy in the front row at court. PA

Ms Rooney accused Ms Vardy of leaking 'false stories' about her to the media after she said she had carried out a months-long 'sting operation', leading her former friend to sue. AFP

Ms Rooney was called 'Wagatha Christie' when she publicly claimed Ms Vardy shared three fake stories she had posted on her personal Instagram account with 'The Sun' newspaper. AFP

Wayne Rooney and Jamie Vardy were England team-mates. The players' partners were known as Wags, short for wives and girlfriends. Getty

Rebekah Vardy started to cry in the witness box while giving evidence at the libel trial against fellow footballer's wife Coleen Rooney.

The TV personality became tearful in the High Court at the start of questions about abuse she and her family have received from online trolls.

She was asked by the judge whether she would like a break.

“I’m not going to take you through the trolling,” Ms Rooney's barrister, David Sherborne, said.

Asked again a few moments later if she would like a break, Ms Vardy replied: “I don’t think it’s going to make any difference, to be honest.”

Earlier, Ms Vardy denied being prepared “to lie under oath” when she said conversations with her agent about leaking information and receiving payment were “never serious”.

On her second day giving evidence in the “Wagatha Christie” libel trial, Ms Vardy claimed she had no knowledge that agent Caroline Watt might be “constantly monitoring” Ms Rooney’s Instagram account.

In a viral social media post in October 2019, Ms Rooney said she had carried out a “sting operation” and accused Ms Vardy of leaking “false stories” about her private life to the press.

Ms Vardy, who is married to Leicester City striker Jamie Vardy, denies leaking stories to the media and is suing her fellow footballer’s wife for libel, while Ms Rooney is defending the claim on the basis her post was “substantially true”.

On Wednesday, Ms Vardy was questioned by Ms Rooney’s barrister about what he suggested were inconsistencies between her evidence in court and her witness statement.

In her written statement, Ms Vardy said: “I have sometimes been caught up in the heat of the moment during conversations with Caroline where I have talked about ‘leaks’ and payment, but these conversations were never serious, and Caroline would have understood that.

“I have never been paid for private information about anybody apart from myself or my family.”

The court earlier heard Ms Vardy had told her agent she “wanted paying” for information about then-Chelsea player Danny Drinkwater leaving police custody after crashing his car in 2019.

Drinkwater was banned from the roads for 20 months and ordered to do 70 hours of community service after pleading guilty to drink-driving.

Mr Sherborne asked Ms Vardy whether she still stood by witness statement evidence, to which she replied: “Yes, apart from the Danny Drinkwater one.”

Mr Sherborne said: “So, there’s an exception.”

The barrister said: “I put it to you that when you say in that witness statement that these conversations were never serious and Caroline would have understood that, that’s completely untrue isn’t it?”

“No, it’s not,” she replied.

He continued: “What this shows, Ms Vardy, is that you are prepared to lie under oath.”

She replied: “No.”

Ms Vardy conceded in court that it was “undeniable” that her agent had seen something on Ms Rooney’s Instagram account but said she had no knowledge of Ms Watt “monitoring” it.

Mr Sherborne highlighted that on the first day of the trial, Ms Vardy had agreed it would have been “wrong” if Ms Watt was looking at people’s private Instagram accounts through the use of Ms Vardy’s account.

Earlier on Wednesday, Ms Vardy told the court that she was “just joking” when questioned about an allegation she had told Ms Watt through text messages to leak a story about a celebrity having an affair with a footballer.

Asked about the messages, Ms Vardy said: “I was just joking when I said this comment.”

“Ms Watt doesn’t think you’re just joking when you say that,” Mr Sherborne replied.

Ms Vardy later denied a suggestion that it was “standard practice” for her to leak private information to The Sun newspaper via Ms Watt.

Ms Rooney is defending the libel claim on the basis of truth and public interest.

The court previously heard that both women have spent “hundreds of thousands of pounds” on the case so far, with the total costs of the case expected to be at least £2 million.

The fake stories Ms Rooney planted on her Instagram during the sting operation featured her travelling to Mexico for a “gender selection” procedure, her plans to return to TV and the basement flooding at her home.

In the post on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook, she wrote: “I have saved and screenshotted all the original stories which clearly show just one person has viewed them.

“It’s … Rebekah Vardy’s account.”