Rebekah Vardy – live: Coleen Rooney’s triumphant messages to friends after ‘Wagatha Christie’ reveal post

Across seven days at Britain’s High Court, the personal lives of Rebekah Vardy and Coleen Rooney have been picked apart with eviscerating care by the country’s top libel lawyers.

“The genie of confidentiality cannot be put back in the bottle once the defence has been filed,” Ms Rooney’s legal team warned ahead of trial, but Ms Vardy pressed ahead regardless - eager to prove that she did not leak Ms Rooney’s private information to The Sun.

Like a tornado sucking in debris, the libel trial has enveloped more and more people daily. Pop star Peter Andre had the size of his manhood discussed in court, model Danielle Lloyd was referred to as a “b****”, and yet others - who had never had a day’s publicity before - found themselves supporting acts in the unfolding drama.

Here are the bystanders in the ‘Wagatha Christie’ trial:

In the final day of Rebekah Vardy’s libel trial against Coleen Rooney, both sides lawyers did their best to fight their corner. Ms Rooney’s lawyer David Sherborne accused Ms Vardy of a “cover up” in which she hid “incriminating evidence”. Ms Vardy’s lawyer Hugh Tomlinson QC pointed the finger at Ms Vardy’s agent Caroline Watt, saying she was “the obvious suspect” for story leaks.

Here are the key moments from Day Seven:

- Ms Vardy carried out ‘cover up’ to hide ‘incriminating evidence’, Ms Rooney’s lawyer argued. “There is only one conclusion that the court should reach and that is that Mrs Vardy deleted the Whatsapp chat and that she has lied on oath and in her witness statement.”

“There is only one reason that she has taken such a step...it was done to cover up incriminating evidence, there is no other plausible explanation.”

- The Rooneys miss court on final day of Wagatha Christie trial. Their lawyer, highlighting the husband and wife had attended the trial throughout so far, said: “They had a long-standing travel arrangement with their four children which was booked in advance by their lawyers.”

- Ms Vardy’s lawyer argued Ms Rooney should pay out ‘substantial damages’. In Ms Vardy’s closing submissions, her legal team argued: “A substantial award of damages should be made in this case.

“The libel was very serious and was published to a huge number of people. Mrs Vardy has suffered very serious (and continuing) abuse as a result. The defence has concluded in an aggressive manner, including at the trial, greatly aggravating the damage caused.”

- Coleen Rooney stands by Wagatha Christie post ‘even more’ at end of trial. Discussing the viral social media post, Ms Rooney’s barrister said: “It is what she believed at the time... and it is what she believes even more so now that we have got to the end of the case.”

- Rebekah Vardy “accepts” her agent could have been the source of leaks to the press, her lawyer said. Speaking about Ms Vardy, Mr Tomlinson said: “She does not know to this day what happened, she does not know where this information came from... It is possible, as she now accepts, that the source of the leak could well be Caroline Watt.”

“Mrs Vardy has obviously made mistakes. One of the mistakes that she made.. is that she trusted someone she shouldn’t have trusted,” said Mr Tomlinson, referring to Ms Watt.

The lights are out in court 13 and it is now down to Ms Justice Steyn, veteran of cases on Guantanamo Bay and Saudi arms deals, to decide whether it was in fact.........Rebekah Vardy, who leaked Coleen Rooney’s private information to The Sun.

Ms Vardy, 39, sued Ms Rooney for defamation after Ms Rooney publicly accused her account of being the source of stories in the tabloid press. The seven-day trial wrapped up on Thursday with closing speeches from both sides. There is now a wait of possibly months before the judge, Ms Justice Steyn, releases her judgement.

Here are the top moments from the High Court trial:

That’s a wrap on the Rebekah Vardy vs Coleen Rooney libel trial. Both sides’ lawyers have finished giving their closing speeches and it is now down to Ms Justice Steyn to give her judgement.

She has reserved judgement, meaning it may be many months before we get her conclusion.

Mr Tomlinson has said that “it’s not reasonable to just fire off a post” like Coleen Rooney did when she posted her ‘Wagatha Christie’ reveal.

“One sees from the way that she did it she was obviously very cross,” Mr Tomlinson said.

Referring to Ms Rooney’s reveal post, he said: “She decided that this was something that she was going to do, she had long suspected Mrs Vardy, she had gone through her long process of posting fake posts… she thought she got one hit, which actually turned out to be wrong, and then she got a second hit”.

He said “the tone was, as your ladyship knows, was one of ‘the whodunnit’.”

“She must have foreseen that this was going to have a big impact,” he argued.

“It had an enormous impact and we say that it is unreasonable that she did it in the manner that she did.”

Hugh Tomlinson QC said that Rebekah Vardy and her agent Caroline Watt occasionally “used the language of leaking”.

He told the court: “The position is clear, really. From time to time, Mrs Vardy and Ms Watt used the language of leaking.

“Your ladyship has to decide what they meant by that. We say in some cases it is just loose language that isn’t really about leaking at all.”

He added: “What actually is happening is that they are gossiping. They are talking about passing on pieces of gossip to the newspapers.”

Mr Tomlinson is again talking about Rebekah Vardy’s agent Ms Watt, saying: “Someone who was in the PR business, Ms Watt, may well have from time to time tried to leak bits of information that she had discovered from the private information.”

Talking about Ms Rooney’s case, Mr Tomlinson said: “The whole emphasis that it is Mrs Vardy who is close to the Sun, was a misdirection, we were looking in the wrong place.

He then moved on to suggest Ms Watt, saying: Of course Ms Watt had a close relationship with the Sun, that’s her job.

“Ms Watt, yes, was clearly interested in providing stories to the Sun,” Mr Tomlinson said.

“Did Ms Watt from time to time go beyond what she was authorised to do?” he asked the court.

Hugh Tomlinson QC told the court that Ms Vardy wanted to be “vindicated” that she was not the person who leaked Ms Rooney’s private information.

He highlighted the “negative impact” the case had had on Ms Vardy, adding: “The media is full of jokes about this case.”

“This is a case about Mrs Vardy and the way that she has been treated by thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of people on social media. She has been subjected to abuse that goes on to this day,” Mr Tomlinson said.

He added that Ms Vardy had continued to receive abusive messages during the trial at the High Court. “This is about her trying to do something about that so she can move on with her life,” Mr Tomlinson said.

Ms Vardy’s lawyer Hugh Tomlinson has told the court that “the obvious suspect is Caroline Watt”.

He argued that “the case against Mrs Vardy only works if it can be shown that” she either leaked the stories herself or knew about it.

Speaking about the leaking of Ms Rooney’s gender selection post in Mexico, Mr Tomlinson said: “I have to conceed that the obvious suspect in relation to this is Ms Watt. That’s not the issue - it’s whether Ms Vardy approved it... we say the evidence just doesn’t go there.”

Mr Tomlinson raised the issue of Ms Vardy’s agent Caroline Watt losing her phone in the North Sea, claiming that Ms Rooney’s lawyer David Sherborne had had “a lot of entertainment with this point”.

“It’s not alleged either that Mrs Vardy pushed the phone into the North Sea or indeed that she had anything to do with it at all,” Mr Tomlinson said.

“The suggestion that somehow this is an aspect of the conspiracy to delete evidence, we say, is misconceived.

“We don’t know the truth of Ms Watt’s position.

“We have no idea as to whether this is a genuine accidental loss of a device or whether it was something done cynically and deliberately to avoid inspection during the disclosure process. We just don’t know,” Mr Tomlinson said.

“From Mrs Vardy’s point of view, she does not know either,” he added.