Joey Barton has apologised to Jeremy Vine and agreed to pay the broadcaster £75,000 to settle a defamation claim over posts on social media.
The ex-footballer made an apology to the Channel 5 presenter on Twitter/X where he admitted he did not believe Mr Vine had a “sexual interest in children” after labelling him a “big bike nonce” and a “pedo defender”.
Barton faced legal action from the TV and radio presenter over 14 online posts and had been raising funds from supporters to defend his “battle for freedom of speech”.
Vine took the ex-footballer to court for libel and harassment, following a social media exchange over Mr Barton’s criticism of women’s involvement in men’s football.
In an apology post on X, Mr Barton said: “Between 8 and 12 January 2024 I published 11 posts which accused Jeremy Vine of having a sexual interest in children, and created a hashtag which made the same allegations, which were viewed millions of times.
“I recognise that this is a very serious allegation. It is untrue. I do not believe that Mr Vine has a sexual interest in children, and I wish to set the record straight.
“I also published posts during the same period in which I referred to Mr Vine having advocated forced vaccination during the Covid 19 pandemic, based upon a video clip of his TV programme.
“I accept that he did not advocate this policy and that the video clip has been edited to give a misleading impression of what he was in fact saying.
“I then taunted and abused Mr Vine for bringing a legal complaint against me. I have agreed not to make the same allegations again about Mr Vine and I apologise to him for the distress he has suffered.
“To resolve his claims against me in defamation and harassment, I have agreed to pay Mr Vine £75,000 in damages and his legal costs.”
A fundraiser set up by the former footballer to help his “battle for freedom of speech” raised just £16,361 of his £100,000.
Mr Barton said the money raised would go to Alder Hey Children’s Hospital in Liverpool after he “decided to settle with JV”.
At a preliminary hearing earlier this month, Mrs Justice Steyn was asked to decide several early issues in the case, including the “natural and ordinary” meanings of the posts and whether they were statements of fact or opinion.
Last month the judge ruled that 11 of the posts could defame Mr Vine.