TORY peer Michelle Mone has paid out more than £50,000 to settle a lawsuit over racism claims, reports say.
The Conservative baroness settled the High Court claim of racial abuse after she allegedly called a man of Indian heritage a “waste of a white man's skin”.
Mone’s lawyers said she had believed that Richard Lynton-Jones was “100 per cent white” when she made the comment over WhatsApp message in 2019.
An investigation by the Metropolitan Police, launched in 2021, was dropped, but Lynton-Jones sued for libel. He was seeking around £200,000 in aggravated damages, according to the Daily Mail.
The disagreement reportedly stemmed from a fatal yacht collision in 2019. Lynton-Jones – whose mother is said to be of Indian heritage – said the incident had traumatised his partner.
In a reply first reported by the Guardian in December last year, Mone is alleged to have said: “Your a low life, a waste of a mans white skin so don’t give us your lies. Your a total disgrace.”
Lynton-Jones said: “I've done nothing wrong apart from be a victim of racism. Racism has no place in this society, let alone for a member of the House of Lords. That's disgusting.”
A spokesperson for Mone denied the baroness was racist. They said: “Both parties have settled their differences on a no fault or damages basis in relation to the alleged racist claim and the matter is now concluded.”
The Conservative peer is facing further scrutiny amid reports that her husband has a financial interest in a firm which won £200 million in public Covid contracts after she recommended it to the UK Government through its illegal “VIP lane”.
Bringing up the awarding of the contracts in Westminster, Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner said: “MedPro, a company linked to Baroness Mone, was handed hundreds of millions of pounds in Government contracts during the pandemic.
“It has now been reported it has been raided by the police as well as her home.
“There are serious questions about the due diligence that was performed on this company, so can the Leader of the House let us know what evidence they hold and why they are refusing to give a single sheet of it out into the public domain?
“What have you got to hide?”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article