Manchester Arena bomb conspiracy theorist loses in court - again

A conspiracy theorist who claims the Manchester Arena bombing was staged and did not kill anyone has been denied a second chance to challenge a ruling that his theory is 'absurd and fantastical'.

Richard Hall is being sued by bombing survivors Martin and Eve Hibbert for harassment, misuse of private information and data protection at the High Court. The father and daughter were at the Ariana Grande concert in May 2017 and suffered life-changing injuries, with Mr Hibbert left with a spinal cord injury and Miss Hibbert facing severe brain damage.

However, Mr Hall has claimed the attack, in which Salman Abedi detonated a homemade rucksack bomb in the crowd of concert-goers, killing 22 people, was faked by government agencies.

READ MORE: Jay Slater missing in Tenerife LIVE updates as desperate search for teen continues

Mr Hall, described as a journalist, broadcaster and media producer, has been accused of visiting the homes and workplaces of those injured in the attack – including Ms Hibbert’s home – and recording footage of them. The full trial in the Hibberts' claim against Mr Hall is expected in July.

In a preliminary ruling in February, Mr Hibbert and his daughter were successful in a bid for summary judgment – a legal step to decide parts of the case without a trial – on several parts of the case’s background.

This included rulings on whether 22 people did die during the attack, and whether the Hibberts’ injuries were caused by the bombing. In March, Mr Hall lost an initial bid to appeal against the judgment without a hearing, and on Friday he was denied again.

Barrister Paul Oakley, for Mr Hall, said that while a judge may find some of the allegations to be “distasteful”, the issues were too complicated to be dealt with through summary judgment.

He told the High Court in London: “I’m not saying my client is going to prove he is correct at trial, I am saying he is entitled to a fair trial.” When asked what Mr Hall’s argument was about where the 22 people who were found to have died in the attack are now, Mr Oakley said: “Three died earlier, others it appears are abroad.”

Mr Hall also said: “A funeral is not evidence of a death, it is evidence of a wooden box.”

In written submissions, Mr Oakley claimed Mr Hall wanted to bring an appeal due to the previous judge’s “comprehensive failure to address factual and relevant evidence”.

But at the end of the hearing, Mr Justice Julian Knowles dismissed Mr Hall’s renewed bid to bring an appeal and said his full reasons would be provided in writing later.