Four UK celebrities hiding sex scandals behind legal super-injunctions are named on Wikipedia Read

Originally posted by lifeissacred
reply to post by spacedonk

 

The fact we live in a society where someone's sex life is considered news worthy is quite embarassing. I could understand these people wanting these injunctions if they were politicians etc, other than that it seems pathetic people even care about celebrities being unfaithful. The only time these things should be taken out is if certain news is likely to jeopardise someones life or interfere with an ongoing police investigation.

It's what they portray to be in public and then what they do in private.

I couldn't care less what they get up to, but just don't play the high and mighty sportstar, who is idolised by millions and then complain when you are caught out. If you don't want to get your fingers burnt, don't play with fire as my Grandad would have said.

All four have already been named in the press, albeit indirectly. One footballer has been described in various articles recently as "having stunned his opponents into silence with his super skills" during one match, or as being "virtually anonymous on the pitch" in another match. The information is there for people who pay attention to it

Edited to add: The main concern is not actually the injunction itself but the "super injunction" nature of it - the ban on identifying the fact that an injunction exists in relation to the specified person. That's a step too far in my opinion.

Originally posted by EvillerBob
All four have already been named in the press, albeit indirectly. One footballer has been described in various articles recently as "having stunned his opponents into silence with his super skills" during one match, or as being "virtually anonymous on the pitch" in another match. The information is there for people who pay attention to it

Edited to add: The main concern is not actually the injunction itself but the "super injunction" nature of it - the ban on identifying the fact that an injunction exists in relation to the specified person. That's a step too far in my opinion.

edit on 28-4-2011 by EvillerBob because: (no reason given)

Yes, that is probably the most vile aspect of the whole shenanigans. The ability to not even be allowed to discuss the existence of an injunction. This is actually massively significant because it then becomes a situation of privileged information and the restriction of information to the people. If nothing else it is a damn dangerous precedent set within a marginal issue that could be argued by legal eagles as being applicable as case law in other much more serious cases where there could be unknown levels of cover ups.

Think nuclear leak hidden from the public by the government through the issue of a super injunction on the basis that it is to protect either the government or the people. (extreme scenario for sure, but...)

Oh by the way, the footballer I checked on Wikipedia was Ryan Giggs. Yes his page is locked.

All other contenders were unlocked, so thanks for confirming Wikipedia!!

Not that any of you are interested of course.

reply to post by Cobaltic1978


I'd heard it was him the other day, didn't bother checking to see if it was the truth or not. I'm off to find the other three

reply to post by Griffo


Well you may be asking who, when you find them. Which begs the question, is this just a publicity stunt for most?

reply to post by Cobaltic1978


oh i thought it was ''spying figgs''

pduk

reply to post by PurpleDog UK


Lol my friend, lol. You have been watching HIGNFY!!!!

reply to post by Cobaltic1978


answers.yahoo.com...

Your search for celebrities ???

If true I am disgusted with one of them Whom I thought was whiter than white...... SAS from Blackburn days and Mrs Radio 5 live G Logon

PDUK

reply to post by PurpleDog UK


Shearer, now he did protray himself whiter than white. A total family man eh?

Although Gaby Logan denied any shenanigans over the weekend, but I guess 'she would say that wouldn't she?'

reply to post by Cobaltic1978


I can neither confirm nor deny

PDUK

more tittle tattle but...
gabby and alan on yahoo answers

both of these people make their living from their wholesome image. Injunction, let alone super injunction utterly inappropriate if true.

Yeah I thought it was Fallon Bearer, Bryan Riggs, Lewan Dereggor and can't remember the other one now?

I thought it was all out online anyway, just couldn't say it on TV?

And perhaps not on sites such as this, hence my (lame) code.

reply to post by blupblup


I'm sure we can name them simply because we are just summising although Wikipedia has assisted in identifying them. If it's not true I guess they can sue us.

Even at 37-years-old, it's nice to see that Giggs is still scoring on and off the pitch.

In fairness to Alan Shearer, I wouldn't say ''no'' to Gabby Logan ( if she asked me nicely ).

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
Even at 37-years-old, it's nice to see that Giggs is still scoring on and off the pitch.

In fairness to Alan Shearer, I wouldn't say ''no'' to Gabby Logan ( if she asked me nicely ).

edit on 28-4-2011 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)

I'm sure you wouldn't but do you think they were thinking of their families when they were doing the do? But as soon as they get caught out, their families are the number one priority.

its the one in the RULING PARTY that interests me
but only through sheer curiosity!
alyxx

reply to post by JohnySeagull


LOL as an Australian Ive never really called soccer a sport, the whole rolling round on the ground anytime someone taps your foot thing turned me right off it.

Your point about the legal system being useless I do agree with but how did it end up in court in the first place? I assumed the only reason it was in court was the injunction to stop the papers printing a story about someones private life, which is NO ONE ELSES BUSINESS!!!!

If a crime was commited yes they should be named if not we all need to back off em

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
LOL as an Australian Ive never really called soccer a sport, the whole rolling round on the ground anytime someone taps your foot thing turned me right off it.

Australians only dislike football because they are absolutely useless at it.

I am pretty sure that you Australians will now start declaring that you don't like cricket, now that we are regularly handing your arses to you on a plate in the Ashes.

As for Aussie Rules... Is that even a sport ? Would anybody over the age of 5 take that rubbish seriously ?

Originally posted by spacedonk
I cannot agree in respect of the footballers they represent themselves as role models and therefore their behaviour is critical. They make money from having a family friendly image. Banging hookers is not kid friendly !

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

No they make money playing soccer (sorry cant bring myself to call it football LOL) the family friendly role model part is only an issue coz clubs want sponsors.

I dont agree with anyone who says their paid athletes therefore should behave a certain way. How many kids grow up saying "I wanna play soccer so I can be a great role model for kids?" NONE.

Im not gonna look into this more but why the controversy about the women being named? Im guessing the guys werent out there blabbing about it which means it was most likely the women doing it. Yeah they cheated which is disgusting but to say they should be publicly humiliated because of it is unfair, If you wanna say everyone regardless of job or position in society should be named when they cheat then that I can jump on board with, but just coz their athletes? not fair.

theres bad people everywhere and perhaps if parents stopped worrying about all these celebs and athletes who are corrupting their children and spent more time being a positive role model themselves Im pretty sure that the kids will grow up just fine despite how many hookers some overpaid git shags in his free time