Twitter Thread

[Mr Popodopolous]

I wouldn't be surprised to see a paper go for it this week regardless. Something has got to break sooner or later.

Would any editor based in England/Wales wish to risk prison though?

[Red-Robbo]

I thought her name came into the public domain because she was named on CTB's superinjunction.

One thing I can't fathom is why CTB is actually pursuing this anymore. I mean his wife must know by now, people who sponsor him and use him in advertising must know - everyone but the most computer illiterate citizen must know his identity. I knew most footballers were thick but c'mon, shutting the gate after the horse has bolted into the twittersphere is pretty retarded!

For a sane BUT LEGAL discussion about why super injunctions are usually a bad thing see this: http://www.fleetstreetfox.com/2011/05/do-not-read-this.html?spref=tw

[Redcliffe 78]

Maybe its the cynic in me, but I can't help but feel that if I was in Imogens position, I would want it kept very hush hush, as quite frankly, she has sh***ed a married man - hardly the most angelic of pursuits.

But instead, she almost seems willing this story to come out, and like I said, if I was a cynical old B'astard, I would say that the longer this drags out, the more she will be able to sell her story for, and book deal, and public appearances etc..

I wonder if she has Max Clifford on speed-dial?

Clifford has been advising her for the last few weeks, she will make big money from this, i agree making money off what she has done is not good, but why should here name be trash and not his, did she force him into bed.

[Red-Robbo]

I thought her name came into the public domain because she was named on CTB's superinjunction.

One thing I can't fathom is why CTB is actually pursuing this anymore. I mean his wife must know by now, people who sponsor him and use him in advertising must know - everyone but the most computer illiterate citizen must know his identity. I knew most footballers were thick but c'mon, shutting the gate after the horse has bolted into the twittersphere is pretty retarded!

For a sane BUT LEGAL discussion about why super injunctions are usually a bad thing see this: http://www.fleetstreetfox.com/2011/05/do-not-read-this.html?spref=tw

[The Bard]

I wouldn't make the assumption that the allegations are true - the judge seemed to think setup and blackmail was a distinct possibility.

I do agree thought that if they were, this injunction was rather stupid and has guaranteed it will be far bigger news than it otherwise would have been.

There may have been an attempt to set up a meeting with her that could be photographed at a distance. However, why would he meet her if he hadn't had an affair? His behaviour is certainly that of a guilty Boyo.

[Red-Robbo]

He's been named in the Commons now - and as you have absolute privilege to report parliamentary proceedings, I guess that's his legal battle up the swannee. Good job, he has so much money to waste.

If it was blackmail the police would've been involved. They aren't which makes me think...

[Redcliffe 78]

A MP has just named the person live in the commons, wow.

[Guest]

Yep John Hemmings has just mentioned it, Sky now have named it.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Video-MP-Names-Footballer-At-Centre-Of-Gagging-Order-In-House-Of-Commons/Article/201105415997439?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15997439_Video%3A_MP_Names_Footballer_At_Centre_Of_Gagging_Order_In_House_Of_Commons

[Fiale]

Agreed, and the stupid thing is everyone seems to have bought into this claim that this is an issue of freedom of speech and the rich and powerful using the court system to lord it over the proliteriat. No, its about Newscorp and whoever else wanting to be able to print/broadcast whatever they want about whomever they want whenever they want and i guarantee that if that ends up the case, barely 5% of it will genuinely be in the name of 'the public interest', rather it will just be 'interesting to the public'

He admitted to the affair - he then broke it off, at this point he was lured to a Hotel where it became a 'honeytrap' - I have no sympathy for him.

Right to a Private family life ok

Right to a private family life, and to gag/silence others when you feel like ******* around not ok

[havanatopia]

It's his life, it's up to him, as long Sir Alex feels it does not affect the job he does then it should remain private.

[Strictly Obi]

I guess it's just a matter of time till _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ is outed, i just think it's amazing how behind the times and antiquated are judicial system is!

[Dollymarie]

I wanna know why they picked CTB, not like it has any connection with his name. Complete Twit Brain maybe.

[Abraham Romanovich]

This is not about some footballer and what he gets up to in the bedroom , it is about the principle

of a superinjunction and what the press can or cannot comment report.

What said footballer gets up to is of little interest to the general public, however a very important principle is at stake.

say for example a politician who is elected on the grounds of supporting family values and then carries on with a lingerie model

are the public entitled to know ? or can he hide behind a superinjunction.

This may not be the best example to qoute but freedom of the press is an important part of democracy.

[Fiale]

It's his life, it's up to him, as long Sir Alex feels it does not affect the job he does then it should remain private.

Threatening to put people in jail for telling the truth - Maybe Cuba is having a bad influence on you.

[Mr Popodopolous]

This is not about some footballer and what he gets up to in the bedroom , it is about the principle

of a superinjunction and what the press can or cannot comment report.

What said footballer gets up to is of little interest to the general public, however a very important principle is at stake.

say for example a politician who is elected on the grounds of supporting family values and then carries on with a lingerie model

are the public entitled to know ? or can he hide behind a superinjunction.

This may not be the best example to qoute but freedom of the press is an important part of democracy.

Agree 100%. As you say, can hide other misdemeanours. Second, free press, freedom of expression=cornerstone of a democratic society.

[Red-Robbo]

The BBC have named him now. That means the country's top lawyers have decided it's OK to say it's Ryan Giggs.

Strange, I thought it was going to turn out to be Geoff Merrick

[glynriley]

I wanna know why they picked CTB, not like it has any connection with his name. Complete Twit Brain maybe.

Cheating Taffy Barsteward !!

[Red_Mat]

The BBC have named him now. That means the country's top lawyers have decided it's OK to say it's Ryan Giggs.

Strange, I thought it was going to turn out to be Geoff Merrick

Well, if the BBC thinks it's ok, we can now all say it as much as we want:

Ryan Giggs, Ryan Giggs, Ryan Giggs.

Oh, that's a relief. I feel so much better for getting Ryan Giggs out of my system. Ahem. So to speak...

[Mr Popodopolous]

Worst kept secret in history- still at least his lawyers will be happy, they're sure to have made a fair few Schillings!

[Mr Popodopolous]

[lager loud]

This is not about some footballer and what he gets up to in the bedroom , it is about the principle

of a superinjunction and what the press can or cannot comment report.

What said footballer gets up to is of little interest to the general public, however a very important principle is at stake.

say for example a politician who is elected on the grounds of supporting family values and then carries on with a lingerie model

are the public entitled to know ? or can he hide behind a superinjunction.

This may not be the best example to qoute but freedom of the press is an important part of democracy.

It's about how some journalists can make some money by selling papers. And some publicists. And how some women can make money by sleeping with famous people (I think there's a name for that profession).

A politician puts him/herself in the public eye, and part of that can be about making an issue of his/her moral principles, so if they are known to be hypocritical they're fair game, as this knowledge could affect voters' intentions. Apart from real hypocrisy, though, I think even politicians should be entitled to keep their private lives private.

A footballer's private life has nothing to do with their job, and they are employed by private companies (so even if their work is affected , it's a matter for their club rather than anyone else). I've never seen an argument that convinces me that this sort of thing is any of my business.

Would you feel the same if you were the subject of this sort of thing? Or would you think that it was a private matter that you should be able to sort out with your family? And would you think it was OK to subject your children to have to put up with the taunts of their schoolmates so that Max Clifford, Rupert Murdoch and a few slappers can make a killing, and so that a few million people can have a good snigger?

Freedom of the press is of course an essential part of living in a democracy. So the Sun should be free to say whatever it wants (or, in reality, what Rupert Murdoch thinks) about the government, the opposition, the economy, the price of eggs, the prospects of humans landing on Mars in the next century and lots of other stuff. It's even important that the BNP gets a hearing.

But to suggest that knowing who a footballer has been humping is part of the same principle is nonsense.

[Redcliffe 78]

It's about how some journalists can make some money by selling papers. And some publicists. And how some women can make money by sleeping with famous people (I think there's a name for that profession).

A politician puts him/herself in the public eye, and part of that can be about making an issue of his/her moral principles, so if they are known to be hypocritical they're fair game, as this knowledge could affect voters' intentions. Apart from real hypocrisy, though, I think even politicians should be entitled to keep their private lives private.

A footballer's private life has nothing to do with their job, and they are employed by private companies (so even if their work is affected , it's a matter for their club rather than anyone else). I've never seen an argument that convinces me that this sort of thing is any of my business.

Would you feel the same if you were the subject of this sort of thing? Or would you think that it was a private matter that you should be able to sort out with your family? And would you think it was OK to subject your children to have to put up with the taunts of their schoolmates so that Max Clifford, Rupert Murdoch and a few slappers can make a killing, and so that a few million people can have a good snigger?

Freedom of the press is of course an essential part of living in a democracy. So the Sun should be free to say whatever it wants (or, in reality, what Rupert Murdoch thinks) about the government, the opposition, the economy, the price of eggs, the prospects of humans landing on Mars in the next century and lots of other stuff. It's even important that the BNP gets a hearing.

But to suggest that knowing who a footballer has been humping is part of the same principle is nonsense.

The Sun got in touch with here and said do you want to talk about this, she said no, then when they done same to Giggs he got a super injustion according to Max Clifford and the Sun newspaper, Clifford is a very clever man, Giggs soliciotors as i have said previousley should look at themselves in the mirror, they have made more money than she will.

[Redcliffe 78]

The High Court have now rejected a third chance to get this overturned by Journalists, makes you wonder if a senior judge in this country is one of them with an injuction.

[Nibor]

There may have been an attempt to set up a meeting with her that could be photographed at a distance. However, why would he meet her if he hadn't had an affair? His behaviour is certainly that of a guilty Boyo.

Massively speculative. Could have been any one of a million reasons to meet, could even be done under complete false pretences.

Without having witnessed anything nobody should make assumptions.

Besides, his personal life should be his own anyway.

[lager loud]

The Sun got in touch with here and said do you want to talk about this, she said no, then when they done same to Giggs he got a super injustion according to Max Clifford and the Sun newspaper, Clifford is a very clever man, Giggs soliciotors as i have said previousley should look at themselves in the mirror, they have made more money than she will.

Fair point about the lawyers - I've no desire to defend them. And if this particular woman wasn't in it for the money then fair enough - I haven't followed this story in detail because I'm not interested - but plenty of women have been in it for the money in the past and will be in the future.

None of that changes the principle that IMO none of this was the Sun's business in the first place. There is no public interest here, just public curiosity. How else could Giggs try to protect his right to a private life?

Freedom of the press is one thing; the freedom of the individual (however rich or famous) to remain unharassed by outside agencies, public or private, is just as important to my mind.

[Redcliffe 78]

Fair point about the lawyers - I've no desire to defend them. And if this particular woman wasn't in it for the money then fair enough - I haven't followed this story in detail because I'm not interested - but plenty of women have been in it for the money in the past and will be in the future.

None of that changes the principle that IMO none of this was the Sun's business in the first place. There is no public interest here, just public curiosity. How else could Giggs try to protect his right to a private life?

Freedom of the press is one thing; the freedom of the individual (however rich or famous) to remain unharassed by outside agencies, public or private, is just as important to my mind.

If i was a Man U fan aslong he does the business on the pitch he could sleep with anyone, Maynard scores 25 goals next year and sleeps with Miss Bristol i don't care, imo this person has put his family through weeks of pain, as i said before man up and stop putting the people you love through this, MBE, Sports Personality i will respect you 2morrow if you put your hands up and play welll for your club Saturday.

[havanatopia]

Threatening to put people in jail for telling the truth - Maybe Cuba is having a bad influence on you.

Good, bad and ugly. Esta la vida.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Fair point about the lawyers - I've no desire to defend them. And if this particular woman wasn't in it for the money then fair enough - I haven't followed this story in detail because I'm not interested - but plenty of women have been in it for the money in the past and will be in the future.

None of that changes the principle that IMO none of this was the Sun's business in the first place. There is no public interest here, just public curiosity. How else could Giggs try to protect his right to a private life?

Freedom of the press is one thing; the freedom of the individual (however rich or famous) to remain unharassed by outside agencies, public or private, is just as important to my mind.

By putting his hands up and admitting it was true or untrue. What he has done is instead of being next weeks chip paper and only in the UK (who given his boy next door image, he would have been forgiven) he has now turned himself into the most ridiculed man on the planet and the fall out from that is his wife and children will suffer ten times as much and if the injunction is to be believed that is what he was trying to protect his family from.

He and his legal team made 2 fatal errors, firstly claiming blackmail, that is a criminal offence with long prison sentences if true he should have gone to the police and secondly the injunction against twitter must be one of the most ridiculous legal decisions of all time.

As for lack of public interest here, morally I as said he profited from his boy next door image, so actually there is some public interest involved. Also had he admitted the truth originally the media would have been viewed as the bad boy here, now because of his and his ridiculous legal teams attempts to shut the world up there is only one bad boy. I have no sympathy whatsoever my dad used to say "honesty is the best policy".

[lager loud]

If i was a Man U fan aslong he does the business on the pitch he could sleep with anyone, Maynard scores 25 goals next year and sleeps with Miss Bristol i don't care, imo this person has put his family through weeks of pain, as i said before man up and stop putting the people you love through this, MBE, Sports Personality i will respect you 2morrow if you put your hands up and play welll for your club Saturday.

I would argue that it's the press that has put his family through this as much as himself, by starting the whole process.

We don't know what conversations he's had with his family, so maybe he has "manned up" with them (TBH, I couldn't even tell you what his family situation is, as I've no interest).

Of course, he (allegedly?) played away and has to live with the consequences if found out. And morally, I agree with you that people should accept the consequences of their actions. But I'd still argue it was no business of anyone except the people involved in the first place.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

I would argue that it's the press that has put his family through this as much as himself, by starting the whole process.

We don't know what conversations he's had with his family, so maybe he has "manned up" with them (TBH, I couldn't even tell you what his family situation is, as I've no interest).

Of course, he (allegedly?) played away and has to live with the consequences if found out. And morally, I agree with you that people should accept the consequences of their actions. But I'd still argue it was no business of anyone except the people involved in the first place.

and the people who pay him millions for his 'boy next door image' and the millions of parents who buy products the he endorses, there is a public interest here.