Independent filmmaker Richard D. Hall is being sued by Martin and Eve Hibbert for claiming that they faked the serious injuries they sustained in the Manchester arena bombing.
In his legal response to the charges, Hall claims that some of the people killed in the attack are in fact alive and well and living abroad with new identities.
According to The Mail Online:
Richard D Hall, a so-called ‘disaster troll’, made his sickening claim about Martin and Eve Hibbert in a 21-page defence document filed at the High Court.
Hall has astonishingly denied the existence of the terrorist bomb at the Ariana Grande concert which killed 22 people and injured more than 1,000 others.
Instead, he claims in his legal response, that the disaster was staged with the possible use of a ‘pyrotechnic type device’ which caused no death or serious injury.
Hall also amazingly states that people supposedly injured in the attack might have been employed as ‘crisis actors’ to pretend it was a terrorist bomb.
His documents states that ‘participants’ may have been ‘managed in readiness for a staged event’ in the foyer where the bomb was detonated.
His most bizarre claim is that the 22 people who were killed might have ‘merely been relocated’ and possibly now living in foreign countries with new identities. He also suggests that some of them might have died earlier in accidents.
Mr Hibbert, 46, and Eve, 20, were severely injured when suicide bomber Salman Abedi detonated his explosive vest just 5m away from them on May 22, 2017.
The father and daughter are now suing Hall after claiming he spied on them, and over his suggestions that they lied about their injuries.
The pair are claiming damages of up to £50,000 from him under the Protection of Harassment Act, for misuse of their private information and breaches of the Data Protection Act.
They are also seeking a restraining order against him in their groundbreaking action to prevent him making further claims.
Their lawyer Neil Hudgell said: ‘Martin is very determined to shut this individual down from harassing his family, and for peddling his outrageous slurs, lies and repugnant views that have caused continuing offence and distress.’
Announcing the pair’s intention to pursue legal action last October, Mr Hudgell said Hall had made ‘outlandish claims following the Manchester Arena atrocity that our clients are not genuine and did not suffer the life-changing injuries they did’.
He added: ‘Several of our clients have had this man on their doorstep, taking photographs, invading their privacy in the most intrusive way. Martin and others are determined to stop this individual from continuing with his repugnant behaviour.’
Hall who has written a book and produced a film on his theories about the Manchester bombing is now claiming that the case against him amounts to censorship of his ‘legitimate’ views.
His defence document is calling for the case to be struck out by the court as an ‘abuse of process’.
It incredibly questions whether Mr Hibbert and his daughter were at the concert, stating that he has not seen any ‘independent photographic or other evidence’ placing them there.
Despite the findings of Greater Manchester Police and the public inquiry held into the attack, he describes the devastating bomb as an ‘incident staged to simulate serious injury or death’.
His document describes the bomb as ‘a pyrotechnic type device or at most a low impact bang’ causing no death or serious harm.
Hall, who describes himself as a journalist, broadcaster and media producer, also argues that Abedi did not die in the blast and simply ran away after dropping a bag containing a low level device.
Instead he describes the Islamic extremist bomber as a ‘willing and co-operative participant to carry out this scheme’.
