Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Martin_1962]

What is the point in these injuctions?

There are loads at the moment over so called celebrity affairs, but it is easy to find out who they are!

I was surprised at the married woman but not any of the others.

Foreign hosted web sites do not care about the British legal system.

And I am not naming any as I know where our server is hosted!

[Kevin Wood]

What is the point in these injuctions?

There are loads at the moment over so called celebrity affairs, but it is easy to find out who they are!

I was surprised at the married woman but not any of the others.

Foreign hosted web sites do not care about the British legal system.

And I am not naming any as I know where our server is hosted!

To protect us from stuff we couldn't care less about, I guess?

[CaptainZok]

Look on the bright side if these injunctions carry on the moron press "might" just start to print some real news.

[Banjax]

yep I couldn't care less who xxxx xxxxx is doing, but its getting a bit much when companies use super injunctions (and hyper injunctions to get around parliamentary priviledge) to cover up corporate negligence 

[Bixy1]

Nowt like a bit of privacy. 

[Martin_1962]

And guess what?

I was totally disinterested until all these injunctions came out.

I mean so many footballers cheat that why hide the fact?

And also what is interesting is that innocent parties are now affected as they are being hounded as they fit the limited information.

[Kevin Wood]

Well, IMHO, if they take offence to Murdoch printing stuff about them they should forego their £50k a week or whatever the going rate is these days and get a proper job like everybody else.

[Broomies Mate]

LOL

If it was Jean up the road, or Steve from number 23 then you might have a private interest due to being 'close' to them.

Why do you want to know about Wayne Rooney and a 'Pensioner' getting jiggy?

I think some people need more in their life to satisfy themselves.

[blackviper90210]

LOL

If it was Jean up the road, or Steve from number 23 then you might have a private interest due to being 'close' to them.

Why do you want to know about Wayne Rooney and a 'Pensioner' getting jiggy?

I think some people need more in their life to satisfy themselves.

I think they all need to GET a life! 

[Martin_1962]

LOL

If it was Jean up the road, or Steve from number 23 then you might have a private interest due to being 'close' to them.

Why do you want to know about Wayne Rooney and a 'Pensioner' getting jiggy?

I think some people need more in their life to satisfy themselves.

I don't that is the point, it is the injunctions which interest me, I think it is related to the Streisland effect.

I am not even sure who some of these people are?

All I know about the above person Wayne Rooney is that he looks like Shrek, plays football and shags grannies.

[Martin_1962]

Well, IMHO, if they take offence to Murdoch printing stuff about them they should forego their £50k a week or whatever the going rate is these days and get a proper job like everybody else.

My thoughts exactly

[Debs.]

If you wish to be 'private' and enjoy a quiet life of seclusion; free from the attentions of the public and press.....

.....then don`t become a public figure: courting the media when it suits your ego and pocket-book and then crying 'foul' when your own actions turn the attention unfavourable.

....."simples!"

[millwall]

r### ##g#    so i guess we cant play hang man due to the injunction  what is this country coming to

[fudgee]

The only people getting worked up about not knowing which celebs are being protected are sad muppets who only want to know because they have a pathetic fasination with the famous and think that celebs are the B all and end all :-? :-?

Sad Sad people, they are the kind of brain dead numptys who read the Sun newspaper, think that the X Factor performers are talented artists and probably watch the Jeremy Kyle show like It's a religion....Doughnuts!!!!

[Nickbat]

Sadly, you're all going about about injuctions being used to protect the sordid details of celebrities' private lives. Of MUCH more concern is the way injunctions are being used to silence free speech and the airing of real grievances.

Read this:

"Last week a heavily pregnant woman, whose name is known to millions but whom I am forbidden by law to identify, was summoned to the High Court at very short notice to show why she should not be imprisoned. The charges against her, brought by a local authority I cannot name, were that she might or might not have been in breach of a court order restraining her freedom to speak about a matter which, again, I am prohibited from identifying. "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8455841/A-mother-is-threatened-with-imprisonment-for-talking-to-her-MP.html