super-injunctions

[Lone Groover 0]

Gawd sake, LG. Don't start any more rumours aboot me.

]

Sorry I am unable to discuss this due to the terms of the Soupinatin injunction.

[samscafeamericain 0]

Never heard of him. Does he play for Partick Thistle 0 ?

No, he plays in the Mexican League

[borderlass 0]

Still its good to know that the Courts are not overrun with violent crime and haver plenty of time to consider these very important patters.

Personally, I have no interest whatsover in the private lives of our "celebrities" and have never understood why there is such a public appetite to read such tripe. If there was not so much demand from the public then the use of super injunctions or any other of injunction in these situations would never arise.

However, I do understand why the courts are taking this seriously i.e. injunctions are put in place for far more serious matters, and if the details can be broadcast online then that is a matter of serious concern.

The issue that needs to considered by the powers that be, is why these injunctions can be bought so readily by those who have the money to do so.

[Pat 0]

Indeed it is a farce:

"Using parliamentary privilege to break the court order, he [M.P. John Hemming] said it would not be practical to imprison the 75,000 Twitter users who had named the player."

And guess what: "The High Court has again ruled that the injunction should not be lifted."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13503847

[harper 0]

I quite like the idea of the internet subverting the rule of justice, especially when the law is a farce...

God,it is a complete farce when British justice is applied in the defense of protecting egotistic, trouser dropping, footballers and wannabe celebs.

*yawn*

[samscafeamericain 0]

And, so it begins

[Pat 0]

The BBC news tonight was hilarious with Sir Alex Ferguson not at all pleased with a journalist who dared raise a guestion about 'one of his players'

Caught with his microphone still on, he asked who he was and then replied: 'We'll get him on Friday'

The poor soul trying to do his job and now he won't see the match. Such power!

[Pat 0]

I quite like the idea of the internet subverting the rule of justice, especially when the law is a farce...

God,it is a complete farce when British justice is applied in the defense of protecting egotistic, trouser dropping, footballers and wannabe celebs.

*yawn*

Looks like even Twitter are prepared to operate within the law and hand over names if legally required to do so. There will soon be nowhere to hide - not even on Twitter.

Dominic Grieve, Attorney General, recognises that policing the internet is a bit of a 'challenge'.

"But that doesn't necessarily mean that the right course of action is to abandon any attempt at preventing people from putting out information which may in some circumstances be enormously damaging to vulnerable people or indeed, in some cases, be the peddling of lies."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/8536641/Gagging-orders-Twitter-prepared-to-hand-over-user-data.html

I'm not convinced that the prime purpose of the super-injunctions is to protect vulnerable people. However, there are certainly those who are quite happy to peddle lies online so good move if unprincipled pranksters find their virtual comfort blanket doesn't afford them quite as much security as they believe.

[samscafeamericain 0]

According to the soaraway SUN Mr Superinjunction has been having an affair with his Brother's wife for the past 8 years

Just where does he get the time

[harper 0]

You can see why he was desperate to keep that one quiet.... absolute shocker.

[gladtobeglas 0]

Well it's clear why the newspapers - at least her over the border - wanted the superinjunction removed. Now the journos are free to fill pages and pages with salacious drivel.

You can almost hear the drool dribbling from their mouths as they decide on their headlines and raunchy revelations and which racy pictures they can use to accompany the 'stories'.

I just cannot understand how anyone can have any sort of interest in such stuff.

Is there anyone here who wants to read the latest shocks?

[samscafeamericain 0]

Well it's clear why the newspapers - at least her over the border - wanted the superinjunction removed. Now the journos are free to fill pages and pages with salacious drivel.

You can almost hear the drool dribbling from their mouths as they decide on their headlines and raunchy revelations and which racy pictures they can use to accompany the 'stories'.

I just cannot understand how anyone can have any sort of interest in such stuff.

Is there anyone here who wants to read the latest shocks?

pomposity being pricked is enjoyable. John Major's back to basics and the post announcement revelations were a hoot. Some wannabe throwing themselves at a celeb so they can then sell the story doesn't interest me at all.