Bomb survivor's life changed in 'every way', trial told

Judges have previously described Mr Hall's claims as "absurd and fantastical"

The Manchester Arena attack affected a survivor's life "in every conceivable way", the High Court has heard at the start of a harassment trial against a man who claims the bombing was faked.

Survivors Martin and Eve Hibbert are suing self-described journalist Richard Hall for harassment and data protection at the High Court in London.

Mr Hibbert was left with a spinal cord injury, while his daughter suffered severe brain damage after they were injured at the Ariana Grande concert in May 2017.

Mr Hall is being sued over several videos and a book in which he claimed the bombing was a "hoax", as well as "secretly filming" Eve and her mother at their house.

Martin Hibbert was left paralysed from the waist down after the attack

Lawyers for Mr Hall said his actions were "pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime", adding he deleted the footage from outside the home.

Mr Hall has claimed that the attack, in which Salman Abedi detonated a home-made rucksack bomb in the crowd of concert-goers, was faked by government agencies using "crisis actors".

The author's attempts to appeal against the action against him have previously been dismissed.

Mr Hibbert and Mr Hall both appeared at the court in London for the first day of the trial.

Jonathan Price, representing the Hibberts, said the pair were some of the closest to Abedi when he detonated the bomb.

The attack changed Mr Hibbert's life "in every conceivable way" and resulted in "life-changing injuries from which they will never recover," the barrister said.

'Unpleasant'

He received 22 wounds from shrapnel, the court heard, while his daughter suffered a "catastrophic brain injury" after a bolt from the bomb struck her in the head - leading to her being presumed dead at the scene.

Mr Price said: "Martin, paralysed, saw Eve lying next to him with a hole in her head and assumed he was watching her die, unable to help.

"He saw others lying dead or injured around him."

Mr Hall has claimed the attack was an "elaborate hoax", that Mr Hibbert is lying, and that Miss Hibbert was disabled before the bombing, Mr Price said.

"Mr Hall says her parents are invoking their daughter's catastrophic disability as part of a huge fraud on the general public," the barrister added.

Paul Oakley, representing Mr Hall, said the author was "perfectly entitled to hold his views and he is willing to amend them if he is made aware of evidence to the contrary."

In written submissions, Mr Oakley said Mr Hall and his beliefs have the right to freedom of expression.

His client's published views, "however unpleasant", were protected, the barrister added.

Mr Hibbert had made a "positive choice" to co-operate with the media concerning the attack, the barrister later said.

"As such, it is Mr Hibbert who has come to the 'harassment' and not the converse."

The court was told there was one incident of Mr Hall filming from a public highway and the footage was never published.

Mr Oakley said this "single incident would not be sufficient" to bring legal action.

The trial continues.