Kerry Katona might whore herself out for reality TV shows and adverts for frozen prawn rings, but never for sex with men – and now that’s super-official!

Yesterday Kerry Katona won five-figure damages from The Sunday Mirror after it claimed that her mother was about to write a book claiming that Kerry was a massive prostitute before she became famous. Which obviously isn’t true for a number of reasons.

Firstly, anyone who’d consider buying a book by Kerry Katona’s mum about how Kerry Katona was a hooker is obviously stupid to the point of illiteracy, which tends not to be a good demographic to market books to. Secondly, and most importantly, Kerry Katona can’t have been a prostitute because most men would rather attack their own genitals with a claw-hammer than pay Kerry Katona cash to touch them with her hands or mouth.

Kerry Katona has been several things in her life – singer, actress, reality TV show star, fat idiot – but she has never ever been a prostitute. That’s because she’s already a bipolar, chainsmoking, recovering drug-addict who’s been held up at knifepoint and is in the middle of a vicious custody battle for her children that’s humiliatingly being played out in public. Being a prostitute on top of all that would just be over-egging the whole ‘bad mother’ vibe, wouldn’t it?

However, that didn’t stop The Sunday Mirror from claiming that Kerry Katona used to be a prostitute back in June. Actually that’s not strictly true. Rather than claim that Kerry Katona used to be a prostitute, the paper claimed that Kerry Katona’s mother was writing a book in which she’d claim that Kerry Katona used to be a prostitute. Which is completely different.

However, the article – given the headline ‘Betrayed by Mum: Kerry’s mother dishes the dirt in explosive new book’ – was still wrong enough for Kerry Katona to march the paper to court and get a great big stack of libel cash out of it, as The Sun reports:

David Price, mum-of-four Kerry’s solicitor-advocate, told London’s High Court the claim was “completely false”. He added: “Sue Katona has never alleged that the claimant worked as a prostitute.” He said the claim “particularly distressed” Kerry, 27, as it allegedly came from her mum, “giving it added credibility”.

In fact, more than writing a book about Kerry Katona’s hooker days, Old Ma Katona hadn’t even written a book or got a publishing deal in the first place. That sort of makes sense, because if Sue Katona is the woman responsible for making Kerry Katona the woman she is today, then we’d expect her manuscript to basically be just three sheets of dribble-covered Crayola scrawls. Although we could be wrong. Nobody sue us.

Besides, Kerry Katona doesn’t need books written by opportunistic third parties to reveal how much of an intrinsically terrible person she is – she’s already got her own MTV reality show, and that does the job perfectly well thank you very much.

So Kerry Katona has definitely never been a prostitute. That’s good news for Kerry but bad news for Iceland. It’d already planned out its next advertising campaign, you see, centred around Kerry Katona standing on a street corner in a miniskirt, leaning into cars to offer dirty old men bags of cook-from-frozen chicken strips and then being beaten up by her pimp.

If you see Hugh Grant or Liz Hurley, you’re bound to want to take a picture of them.

That’s just basic logic at work – your choices are essentially limited to taking a picture of Hugh Grant or Liz Hurley or approaching them and saying “Hi, I really loved you in Music And Lyrics/ Passenger 57.” And only the very worst kind of pathological liar would think to do that last one.

But wait – don’t go taking pictures of Hugh Grant and Liz Hurley without their permission, because they’ll sue you and win £58,000, which is what happened yesterday after a photo agency took their picture on holiday. The moral of this story is that Hugh Grant and Liz Hurley value their privacy, although clearly not enough to stop making films and doing modelling jobs. Even though everyone sort of wishes they would.

We feel sorry for celebrities sometimes. Holidays should be a time for them to relax and unwind, but the current celebrity-obsessed culture means that there’ll always be an interest in them wherever they are on the planet. What kind of a world do we live in when a celebrity can’t even angrily shout at a child until it cries without it ending up in a newspaper? It’s disgusting.

Not even Hugh Grant and Liz Hurley are safe from this level of media intrusion. Although one of them is determined to keep churning out ever more creepy romantic comedies to growing public indifference and the other doesn’t really do anything, it didn’t stop a photographer from secretly snapping them on holiday together in a private resort in the Maldives recently.

Photographs? On holiday? Without permission? Surely people are only allowed to do that if they then track you down an hour later with the photo digitally printed onto a flimsy plastic plate and try to make you buy it for £35 while shouting “souvenir” at you in a funny accent.

Apparently so, because Hugh Grant, Liz Hurley and her husband Arun Nayar have just managed to sue Big Pictures for £58,000 in damages after it sold the secret holiday photos of them to newspapers.

Of course the newspapers were interested in the photographs because a) Hugh Grant, his ex-girlfriend Liz Hurley and her husband Arun Nayar went on holiday together? That’s a bit fruity, and b) The papers got to rock out some truly hopeless headlines because of it. The Times reports:

[Lawyer] Laura Tyler told Mr Justice Eady that the photos were taken covertly without their knowledge while they were on holiday in a resort which they had chosen for the privacy and seclusion it offered. “It has been most upsetting for the claimants to have their privacy invaded by these defendants,” she said… News Group published three of the photos in News of the World in an article headed “Liz does the blokey-cokey”. Associated published four photos in The Mail on Sunday in an article headed “Hugh’s that gooseberry?”.

So congratulations to Hugh Grant and Liz Hurley for winning their lawsuit. After all, everyone knows that when someone takes your photograph they steal a little bit of your soul, which is why Hugh and Liz have fought so hard over these holiday snaps. True, having sat through American Dreamz and Double Whammy we’re not entirely convinced that Hugh Grant or Liz Hurley actually had souls to begin with, but let’s not rain on their special moment right now.

Read more:

Liz Hurley, Hugh Grant and Arun Nayar win damages for invasion of privacy – Times

The best thing about Strictly Come Dancing is that all the celebrities are clearly sleeping with their dance partners. Clearly.

Except one. GMTV‘s Kate Garraway – who took part in last year’s Strictly Come Dancing – definitely didn’t have sex with her chinny professional partner Anton Du Beke, and if you say she did you have to give her loads of money.

Which is what the Sunday Mirror has done after publishing a story claiming that Kate Garraway and Anton Du Beke were having an affair. In retrospect it seems like a silly claim – the thought of a Garraway/Du Beke affair seems ludicrous. Because, well, because he’s a massive chinny chin machine with a great big chinny chin.

Typical. Our life is basically a procession of not sleeping with any dancers whatsoever at all over a period of many, many years. But nobody cares about that, do they? Meanwhile Kate Garraway doesn’t sleep with one dancer once and newspapers have to chuck all kinds of substantial libel damages at her. Really, where’s the justice?

Earlier this year, The Sunday Mirror published a report that appeared to claim that Kate Garraway and Anton Du Beke were continuing an affair that began when they took part on Strictly Come Dancing together.

But it turns out that the report was absolutely false, because Kate Garraway has just accepted a giant lump of cash from the Sunday Mirror because of all the nasty lies it told. BBC News reports:

GMTV presenter Kate Garraway has accepted “substantial” libel damages from the Daily Mirror and Sunday Mirror over claims she committed adultery. The star, who is married to former Labour spin doctor Derek Draper, said she was “glad” the matter was resolved. “The way my friendship with Anton was twisted into something sordid was terribly unfair and upsetting,” the 39-year-old said. “No-one likes to take legal action against a newspaper but I could see no alternative.”

You know, we’d even go one step further than Kate Garraway here – claiming that she had an affair with Anton Du Beke isn’t just sordid, it’s downright nonsensical. Put yourself in Anton Du Beke’s place and you’ll see why.

Firstly, prior to Kate Garraway, Anton Du Beke’s other Strictly Come Dancing partners were Lesley Garrett, Esther Rantzen, Jan Ravens and Patsy Palmer. Having to dance with those women week after week would turn any man into a snarling misogynist who’d rather stab forks into his eyes than bring himself to look at a female again, let alone have sex with one.

Secondly, and this is the most important point, did you see how Kate Garraway danced on Strictly Come Dancing? They say that how someone dances is an indication of how they have sex, and if that’s the case then making love to Kate Garraway must be like catching your genitals in a bear trap that’s been welded to an out-of-control washing machine balanced on a trampoline in a wind tunnel.

And – trust us, this is experience talking – no man wants to do that. Not again.

Read more:

GMTV host Garraway wins damages - BBC

Leslie Ash has reportedly won more than £500,000 in damages for her hospital superbug drama, which halted her TV career and almost killed her.

The payout comes just weeks before she was due to start a £1m lawsuit against the NHS. Her lawyers said that Ash lost out on "hundreds of thousands of pounds" in future earnings, and told the Daily Mirror that “Matters are at a delicate stage, but we are no longer going to court. It will be settled this week.”

Life started rosy for Leslie Ash, bursting onto our screens in 1964 asking "Mummy, why are your hands so soft?" in an effort to get our impressionable minds to wash our dishes with Fairy Liquid. Her most famous role was as Neil Morrissey’s romantic interest Deborah in the BBC’s Men Behaving Badly. It was a ratings success, pulling in over 10 million viewers at its peak – the beautiful Leslie was on top of the world.

But it all started to fall apart on that fateful, vanity punishing day, when she said “Hello there, Mr Plastic Surgeon. I am really gorgeous already and should probably be thankful for that, but my fashion sense is tingling. The Puffer fish look is coming in, and I want to be the pioneer.” Alas, nobody followed suit, and she was fucking humiliated.

And it went even further down-hill from there. She contracted Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) – a variant of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) after being admitted to London's Chelsea and Westminster Hospital in April 2004, with a punctured lung and two broken ribs, which she claimed were the result of 'vigorous' sex with her husband, ex-footballer Lee Chapman.

Vigorous. 

(Yes. It begs the question: What kind of sexual act would lead to these injuries? Maybe Chapman is akin to Lennie from John Steinbeck’s
Of Mice and Men, thinking that the tighter he squeezed her, the more love he was showing? Or perhaps Chapman was bored of the regular orifices and wondered if the chest would work as one? We just don’t know. If you, dear reader, have any suggestions, then please leave them in the comment box below.)

She was discharged days later but returned after losing all feeling in her legs – and ended up confined to a wheelchair. Today she can only walk with the aid of a stick.

With the reported £500,000 soon to be safely in Leslie Ash's back pocket, we are left to wonder what she will spend it on. Unfortunately, the technology isn’t yet available to return her lips to former glories, but hecklerspray has a plan B: Instead of shrinking your lips, why not put collagen in every other part of your head, until the lips-to-face ratio is back to normal? This, of course, will then disrupt your head-to-body ratio, but that’s nothing that a bomber jacket and stilts couldn’t hide.

Leslie, you’re very welcome.

Read more:

Leslie's Big Payout – Ananova 

Say what you like about Samatha Janus – actually, no, don't say what you like about Samantha Janus, especially if it's about how much Samantha Janus likes having lesbian orgies on drugs, because she'll just end up suing you.

And more than that, she'll end up winning – because Samantha Janus definitely, officially, legally doesn't like to have massive lesbian orgies on drugs, because that's what The Sunday Sport said about her and she's just won a giant load of damages for it. And let's hope that Samantha Janus' disinterest in having massive sweaty lesbian orgies on drugs also stretches to the rest of her EastEnders TV family, because that way we know that the frankly rather sickening mental images we've been having of Phil Mitchell all red-faced in the middle of a three-hour massive sweaty lesbian sex orgy on drugs will never manifest themselves physically.

As the recent scandal over the nonexistant '2 hecklerspray writers 1 cup' internet video has taught us, it's not nice when people make up lies about your sexual preferences. For the record, there were six of us present and it wasn't a cup, it was a bucket. Really, when will these lies stop?

In the past Desperate Housewife Teri Hatcher had to deal with sexual lies being printed about her when media outlets claimed she shagged a load of men in a camper van – something so untrue that Teri Hatcher won a stack of compensatory damages from whoever published it. And now it's the turn of Samantha Janus, the actress famous for acting like a bit of a slapper in woefully-dated mid-nineties sitcom Game On, acting like a bit of a slapper in the woefully-dated late-nineties sitcom Babes In The Wood and prancing about in her bra in all sorts of lad's mags when they were still popular.

But recently Samantha Janus was handed a golden lifeline to save her from a future of Where The Heart Is and Judge John Deed guest-spots when she was given a job on EastEnders as Ronnie Mitchell – niece of Peggy Mitchell, cousin of Phil Mitchell and sister to a woman who looks like an Alan Sugar Terrahawk puppet. But with renewed success came renewed unwanted media attention for Samantha Janus, and it wasn't long before newspapers were banging on about all the three-hour massive sweaty dirty lesbian sex orgies on drugs that she has.

Or doesn't have, should we say. In the summer, The Sunday Sport printed an article claiming that Samantha Janus had a three-hour drug-fuelled lesbian sex orgy with her boyfriend and one of her female friends, while also claiming that she had unprotected sex with a male model in his car on a public street once – and all of it was so untrue that Samantha Janus has taken the newspaper to court for libel and won all sorts of undisclosed damages.

The article was also accompanied by two topless pictures of Samantha Janus taken by her old boyfriend that were not intended for publication. In court it was argued that the photos should have never been published, possibly because anyone who wants to see Samantha Janus topless that much can rent either bad rugby movie Up 'N Under or bad generic drama Different Strokes instead of going through the humiliating process of buying The Sunday Sport.

Anyway, all this goes to prove is that you'd better not tell lies about Samantha Janus' sex life; just like other EastEnders faces Stacey Slater, Dirty Den and Sean Slater. But that's only because they've respectively had sex on CCTV in a hotel corridor, dressed up as Captain Hook and wanked off on the internet and apparently sent a model a photo message of a pig with a penis for head, and it be hard to come up with lies that are funnier than those.