Indeed Mr Baldwinson who created the Dream Troll image electronically made it clear that the Dream Troll image had no political purpose and was not intended to make or include any political reference and his evidence was agreed. 88. Further, showing that some persons might consider the use of the “S” in the Dream Troll image, when taken together with the colour scheme and gothic writing, to be similar to the “S” in the “SS” Nazi symbol does not show that the defamatory meaning that I have identified did not seriously harm Mr Burgon’s reputation for the purposes of section 2(3) of the Defamation Act 2013. This is because, although a story might be made from the fact that the stylised “S” might be taken to be similar to the “S”’s used in the “SS” symbol, it is a different and much less serious imputation than asserting that Mr Burgon has joined a band which as he knew took great pleasure in using Nazi symbols. This is because one is a Nazi symbol and it is common ground that the Nazis were uniquely evil. The other is a stylised “S” which is derived from the Black Sabbath album cover which if placed together with another “S” (which it was not) might resemble the “SS” symbol. No defence of honest opinion – paragraph 7(d) 89. In this case the meaning which I have identified is one of fact, and therefore the first condition set out in section 3(2) of the Defamation Act 2013 cannot be satisfied. 90. In this respect I note that the opinion sought to be defended, namely a terrible misjudgement was based on the “facts” that Mr Burgon joined a band which he knew took great pleasure in using Nazi symbols. In some respects there is no need to say that joining a band which you know takes great pleasure in using Nazi symbols is a terrible misjudgement because every right minded person will form a very negative opinion of the person who has joined such a band. I have already found that these facts were not true but it is not necessary to get into an analysis of whether the facts referred to in section 3(3) on which the honest person could have held the opinion, need to be the facts set out in the article because this is not a case of opinion. 91. There was an issue about whether Mr Newton Dunn held the opinion that Mr Burgon had made a terrible misjudgement. In the email sent to Ms Street Mr Newton Dunn asked “is it really appropriate for a shadow justice secretary to be associating with a band that uses Nazi iconography to promote itself?” suggesting that Mr Newton Dunn thought that it was inappropriate for Mr Burgon to be associating with the band and that the band used Nazi iconography to promote itself. After being told about the Black Sabbath album cover Mr Newton Dunn said “it’s still Nazi iconography, is it not, to use the SS symbol and German military font in the band’s name?” showing that Mr Newton Dunn believed the Dream Troll image to use Nazi iconography. The letter dated 28 July 2017 stated that Mr Newton Dunn did hold, and continues to hold, “the opinion that it was unwise of your client to join a band which uses Nazi symbols given he is a prominent member of the Labour party”. In the defence at paragraph 7 it was pleaded that the opinion was that “the Claimant had demonstrated terrible misjudgment and exposed himself to ridicule by associating himself with a band which, as he knew, uses Nazi associated iconography in its promotional material”. In further information dated 16 January 2018 it was identified that the opinion identified in paragraph 7 of the defence was held by Mr Newton Dunn. As noted above Mr Newton Dunn said “when I looked at the picture of the band’s album it seemed to me it was using Nazi iconography. I thought that this called into question the Claimant’s