A chimney sweep’s gem find 300 years ago could hold the key to unlocking the answer to this amazing case.

Lawyers for Coleen Rooney, who is locked in a libel battle with Rebekah Vardy, wife of ex-England footballer Jamie Vardy, are relying the Armory v Delamirie court case in 1722, which involved a London sweep’s boy and a jeweller.

Marc Armory was the boy who found a jewel-encrusted ring. Pleased with his find, he went off to get it valued.

However, during valuation, the  jeweller’s apprentice secretly removed the gems, and gave it back to Armory, telling it was worth just three halfpence.

The case ended up in court, with Armory defending himself. The case went down in legal history with the judge ruling that – regardless who truly owned the jewellery – both sides had a claim to it. This is partly how the ‘finders keepers’ saying came about.

However, the crucial part in relation to the ‘Wagatha Christie’ trial today, is that just because the gems were not present, it doesn’t mean to say they didn’t exist. 

Therefore, in their absence, the court considered them as being the maximum value possible.

 Lawyers for Rooney are honing in on this crucial ruling after the libel trial heard that messages and texts on Vardy’s agent’s mobile phone cannot be accessed as the phone was allegedly ‘lost’ in the North Sea.

They hope the precedent set by the sweep’s case would mean that, for the purposes of the libel trial, that the messages did exist and would have contained the ‘smoking gun’ Coleen needs to prove her allegations that Vardy was leaking stories about her to the press.

Jim Waterson, media editor at The Guardian, explained: “The agent has maintained it was an unfortunate incident that occurred after the boat hit a wave while she was filming the Scottish coastline.

“Due to the absence of direct evidence, Rooney’s legal defence has relied on the 300-year-old court ruling. It set a precedent that if the court can tell that evidence is missing, then the assumption should be that what is missing is of the highest possible value that would fit the hole. 

“Rooney’s lawyers argue this precedent applies just as much in a case involving a missing gem in a piece of 18th century jewellery as it does in the case of missing WhatsApp messages sent by a footballer’s wife.”

The Rebekah Vardy-Coleen Rooney case has gripped the media. As wives of ex-England footballers Jamie Vardy and Wayne Rooney, they were part of the so-called WAG (Wives and Girlfriends) contingent which followed England to major tournaments.

Rooney alleged that stories about her private life were leaked to the tabloid press via Vardy’s team. She claims she knows this after turning detective, by limiting her social media viewers to just one person – Vardy.

Rooney then placed false stories on her social media. When these were duly published in the papees, she pointed the finger at Vardy. The process of Rooney turning detective led to the saga being dubbed ‘Wagatha Christie’.

Vardy is now suing Rooney for libel, saying the allegations are untrue.

The hearing has now finished. The judge, Mrs Justice Steyn, will consider her ruling, which will be made on a later date.