Super Injunction, who is this footballer?

[newguy]

I just feel sorry that Imogen Thomas can be accused of all sorts and is not able to defend herself or put forward her side of the story. (Saying that she is going to be minted if/when the injunction gets dropped)

Not fair on the other footballers who have been named as the suspected party either.

That said I'm surprised this thread is still here considering some of the content.

Gary

Isn't she set to be on I'm a Celebrity, rumoured to be getting £100,000? If anything this injuntion will benefit her more than anyone. It turns it from a one day story, into something that's set to drag on for months. She's become part of the super injunction story, so until some clarity develops around this area we'll no doubt be hearing from and about Imogen pretty frequently.

 

[jwm]

front page of a Scottish paper this morning

http://yfrog.com/h8x9nxvj

 

[golddiggerguy]

Just jumping to domains, I'm liking the way "Super Injunction" has just been registered in the past few weeks on most of the extentions.

A term which will be a flash in the pan so would need to turn a site around pretty fast to get in on the searches.

 

[droid]

front page of a Scottish paper this morning

http://yfrog.com/h8x9nxvj

That newspaper website seems to be very busy now.

Gary

 

[jwm]

.

 

[diablo]

Posted thanks above Blossom

Say in this case where the footballer took out a super injunction.

For it to be legal, surely the court or footballer would have to inform every media in the UK so they could block any publication.

And say someone did post that he had an affair, surely they cant prosecute you, as a court would say well you did, and they are not telling lies, so no case?

Maybe im missing something.

Firstly this super injunction only applies to England and Wales - he would need to come to Edinburgh to see if a court would grant one for Scotland. Hence the Herald today.

A court would throw out a super injunction if the information was already in the public domain - so for any super injunction to work, it has to apply to very few people in practice.

Media lawyers are over every such story with a fine-tooth comb so if their newspaper was going to run such a story they would soon discover if an injunction preventing them from publishing was in place.

As for not being able to prosecute you for telling the truth, you would be prosecuted for contempt of court if you were found in breach of a super injunction, not for telling the truth.

It's a balance between the right of privacy and the freedom of speech - truth isn't at issue.

 

[wb]

A court would throw out a super injunction if the information was already in the public domain - so for any super injunction to work, it has to apply to very few people in practice.

I'm glad someone else understands this