Sunday Herald names injunction footballer

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 17:39

A Scottish newspaper has named a footballer accused of being linked to a privacy injunction by users of social networking website Twitter.



The Sunday Herald is the first mainstream UK publication to do this



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13491086

Snaefell



Joined: 07/06/2009
Posts: 266

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 18:14

Yes it was on their website early this morning, full page photo of his face. However it has now been taken down. The photo is all over Twitter though, and his name. The Daily Mail states that half the population of Britain now know who he is, so his injunction has rather backfired on him!

greenman


Joined: 16/02/2008
Posts: 526

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 18:55

Picture still here: http://twitpic.com/50z730#

Scoty


Joined: 23/05/2010
Posts: 846

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 18:59

well - who could that be?

jock1



Joined: 06/01/2008
Posts: 3786

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 19:03

Rhymes with figs....

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 19:03

I never thought It was him!

greenman


Joined: 16/02/2008
Posts: 526

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 19:03

The court identifies him as CTB - obviously means Complete Total Barsteward.

Any other suggestions?

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 19:06

Liked tis one



Imogen Thomas has launched a singing career to play down speculation of having an affair with an unnamed Premiership footballer. She's currently doing Giggs in Manchester!!

Scoty


Joined: 23/05/2010
Posts: 846

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 19:09

Msg 8 - brilliant

spangles


Joined: 22/10/2008
Posts: 411

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 19:19

Even I have known who it was for weeks. Hasn't he made himself look stupid?

Pugwash


Joined: 06/09/2010
Posts: 1797

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 19:31

Indeed had been better if he had confessed.

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 20:07

Will he sue the Herald?

Scoty


Joined: 23/05/2010
Posts: 846

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 20:17

Depends if the injunction was taken out in Scotland. If only England ( covers Wales for some reason) can't do much I would think but I know nothing re these laws.

Brinsley


Joined: 04/04/2009
Posts: 6858

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 20:22

Msg 8

She's bought herself a new model with lots more Gigga bytes in it!



Richard

dalartokat


Joined: 14/04/2008
Posts: 734

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 20:24

philbailey, its just been on the news that the rules for Scotland are different and thats why they got away with publishing the photo so, maybe, suing might not be an option for him.

YFred


Joined: 06/05/2009
Posts: 1471

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 20:29

I though she could afford Terrabites, on account that Giggsy baby like to bite her in the neck

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 20:33

!00k well spent

his lawyer must be laughing all the way to the bank

AlsancakJack



Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 5762

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 20:41

How sad

17 posts of of nothing else but idle gossip.

What interesting lives you all have.

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 20:49

Msg 18 , could it be about freedom of speech?

YFred


Joined: 06/05/2009
Posts: 1471

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 21:29

AJ it is not idle gossip at all. The lad pretends to be as good as gold and has no control on the old trouser snake. I knew we had a snake problem in Cyprus but bloomin heck not in Manchester too, surely.

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 21:33

msge 19



Nothing to do with freedom of speech. How can it be in anybody's personal interest, let alone our national interest, to know anything about this event.

Same with 'Fred the shred', I cant stand the bloke, but his affair at RBS has nothing to do with the decisions he made at the bank. Its all just complete and utter bollocks. Its may be a sign of a broken nation when this sort of stuff dominates the news.



Its got a lot more to do with peoples need for voyeurism and the selling of sleazy newspapers than freedom of speech.



Now where's my copy of the news of the world, I had it with me this morning

bigbadbob


Joined: 04/08/2010
Posts: 368

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 21:38

Nobody has mentioned it but I wonder if his wife has banned him from the marital bed?

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 21:45

I didn't think he was married!

bigbadbob


Joined: 04/08/2010
Posts: 368

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 21:48

MSG23 it does refer to a married footballer in the press.

bigbadbob


Joined: 04/08/2010
Posts: 368

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 21:53

Msg he married his long term partner Stacey in september 2007.

Quarmby


Joined: 15/09/2008
Posts: 975

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 22:07

What was his injunction for?.........Protecting his sponsership deals?

bigbadbob


Joined: 04/08/2010
Posts: 368

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 22:21

Msg26 and his wallet!!

shrimp


Joined: 01/09/2010
Posts: 939

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 22:40

I think he married his mistress thus creating a job vacancy......................

Riddles


Joined: 26/04/2011
Posts: 429

Message Posted:
22/05/2011 23:51

Well, he was flaunting his two kids at the Premiership Trophy presentation so everything's OK at home, obviously...

denizen



Joined: 21/08/2009
Posts: 388

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 00:10

Same with 'Fred the shred', I cant stand the bloke, but his affair at RBS has nothing to do with the decisions he made at the bank. Its all just complete and utter bollocks. Its may be a sign of a broken nation when this sort of stuff dominates the news.



I think that is exactly what the inquiry is about. Was his mind on the job.

No, not that job.

greenman


Joined: 16/02/2008
Posts: 526

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 00:20

Message 21: ilovecyprus, Regarding Fred the Shred i.e. Sir Fred Goodwin, your naive 'but his affair at RBS has nothing to do with the decisions he made at the bank' is not shared by the MP and Lord who defied the Injunction. The Financial Services Authority will be investigating whether Goodwin's affair during a period when the Royal Bank of Scotland was heading towards oblivion due to some disastrous decision making by Goodwin, contributed to its downfall.

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 00:25

I hope no one has named him here .



just to be safe



do not want another donation thread

MsGarnet


Joined: 04/01/2009
Posts: 989

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 02:43

Whilst it is beyond me what Imogen Thomas saw in this multi-millionaire footballer; it's not like she hasn't been round the block; known to be available to anyone who is prepared to compromise on their standards. When she was on a programme called "celebrity coach trip" she feigned shock, embarrassment and horror when two actors (whose names escape me) got out of a bath and one of them briefly allowed their wedding tackle to show. I thought then, what a pathetic stupid production number she put on for the cameras, fit for a ten year old, but not someone who had a history of multiple liaisons. She was also on another programme whereby 'celebrities' (one uses that term in the loosest sense where she is concerned) went to a third world country to live in the same shacks and use the same toilets as the indigenous poor, in an effort to improve their lives. She refused to follow through, it made her "feel sick". She is an inane vacuous spoilt brat, famous, merely, for being infamous.

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 02:47

Msg 33 , agreed

but more so stupid for the un-named to get involved

these "celeb" girls are not the most discreet

it is their meal ticket

the "lads" mags lap it up

lesshaw42



Joined: 21/01/2009
Posts: 101

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 04:50

are we allowed to say ryan gigs here or have i said something wrong...

AlsancakJack



Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 5762

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 06:26

philbailey

Message 19:



'could it be about freedom of speech?'



An educated debate about freedom of speech? Your having a laugh.

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 08:07

Msg 36, maybe

but check the hits on this thread

compared to any other from yesterday



over 2000



maybe people like gossip?

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 08:10

I will leave the freedom of speech debate

for you and Polly/ misunderstood





I love irony

AlsancakJack



Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 5762

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 08:17

philbailey

Just because your thread gets over 2000 viewings does not mean anything. It is the conversion of those viewings to comments that mean something. So obviously the vast majority do not feel as though they want to comment because they have no further interest after looking at the first posting (which of course you need to do to find out what the thread title is all about).

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 08:51

So sorry msg 39

I know that most threads

generate over 2000 views in less than 24 hours

I just checked the last few pages

but thank you for replying 3 times

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 11:07

Whilst observing AJ, laughing at a discussion re the merits of 'freedom of speech' gives me an ironic smirk - I DO agree that discussing the ID of someone who has an injunction in place in the land where this server is located - isn't 'wise'....



*You* might be posting in 'TRNC' ..but the server isn't...



A simple internet search shows us WHO it is, but republishling the name on here is NOT 'clever'

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 11:56

msge 31 Greenman



I wonder if it is not the Lord and MP who are the ones seeking publicity. The question is 'Did Goodwin takes his eye of the ball as a consequence of the affair?' Very unlikely, in fact you could argue it made him even more focused. Sex could have calmed his nervous system down in times of stress. J F Kennedy said he needed to have sex at least once a day to keep his mind on the job.



The real reason RBS went to the wall was that they got too greedy and overconfident. They had taken over 26 companies in 8 years including Nat West. They got in to a price war with Barclays over ABN Amro and paid way over the odds for that company. This happened at a time when the market was collapsing.



"Goodwin, being one of Britains most despised and hated individuals, is a convenient instrument in the press's battle to wrest back power from the judiciary over its absolute freedom to publish whatever it wants about the private lives of the rich, famous and plain stupid" Lawson

greenman


Joined: 16/02/2008
Posts: 526

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 12:22

Message 42: I'll reserve comment until the FSA have carried out their investigation on Sir Fred.

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 12:28

msge 43



Now you are one being naive. How are they going to determine if it impacted his judgement?

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 13:56

Just a couple of things to ponder



Has Ryan Giggs (who is the subject of this thread) decision making process been impaired through an extra marital affair? I don't think so, he is still playing the perfect pass at 36.



Hitler (asexual) and Napolean (not tonight Josephine) might have benefited from getting their leg over. Not noted for their ultimate decision making.



Mary Douglas the anthropologist in her book 'purity and danger' shows how we contaminate our decisions (make poor decisions) by mixing them with things that we deem to be unclean. Those who deem sex dirty (the protestant view) often believe that those who commit adultery must be poor decision makers. For surely, you must be a poor decision maker merely by the act of committing adultery. So in their view, Fred the shred, must, by the pure fact that he committed adultery, have made poor business decisions.

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 15:48

Looks like the injunction may be overturned?



http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3595734/Sun-fights-Prem-stars-court-gag.html

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 17:52

Or not



A JUDGE today refused to scrap a draconian injunction preventing The Sun from identifying the Prem star who romped with Big Brother's Imogen Thomas.

Tootie


Joined: 28/08/2008
Posts: 2037

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:02

Funny really how the press are not allowed to print something for once that's actually TRUE

bigbadbob


Joined: 04/08/2010
Posts: 368

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:03

It may well be time to remove the offending footballers name from this thread as we do not want legal problems for this site.BBB

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:11

msge 49



I am not sure they can take any action against a site in the pariah state of the TRNC

Tootie


Joined: 28/08/2008
Posts: 2037

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:12

I dont think 44 would have any legal problems.....?

bigbadbob


Joined: 04/08/2010
Posts: 368

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:16

I also thought that but according to mmmmmmm earlier on this threadhe did indicate that theserver is in the UK which may cause problems.

Tootie


Joined: 28/08/2008
Posts: 2037

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:17

Even if the host company for 44 is in the UK,

I think they have bigger fish to fry over the injunction than 44. lol

bigbadbob


Joined: 04/08/2010
Posts: 368

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:19

Msgs 50 and 51 look at msg 41.

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:20

Also read at the bottom of the page



"Notice: Cyprus44 has no responsibility for the content featured in this board."



so maybe the individuals should be worried

bigbadbob


Joined: 04/08/2010
Posts: 368

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:21

Msg 53 you are probably correct but I would not like to tempt fate.

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:39

msge 55



perhaps you would like to read msge 53 again



perhaps you like to stir shit

deputydawg


Joined: 30/03/2010
Posts: 1727

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:43

Phil. There is no right to oust the jurisdiction of the courts by a disclaimer.

MsGarnet


Joined: 04/01/2009
Posts: 989

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 18:46

What I find odd about the whole thing - is why is it anybody's business what footballer has a tryst or three with an inarticulate bimbo whose intelligence clearly matches her shoe size? Historically, adultery and unfaithful behaviour has been with us since the world began, and will remain until it comes to an end (the timing of which, may depend on which Faith you follow)! For the press to labour the point daily, attaches and implies huge import to what is, after all, just a seedy dalliance between two emotionally incontinent people - the fact they have both intentionally destroyed the lives of the wife and children involved is for them to live with - all they were concerned with was indulging in their base desires, the hell with what wreckage they left behind - why does society give them the oxygen of publicity - making them feel they are more than the non-entities they in fact are................

greenman


Joined: 16/02/2008
Posts: 526

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 19:05

MsGarnet: I have no interest in who is having an affair with whom, but this issue of super injunctions is much more important. First of all it is only available for those with money, therefore giving an even greater disparity between law for the rich and law for the poor in society. Secondly, while the 'seedy dalliance' of minor celebrities is of little interest to me, the possibility that super-injunctions could be applied to corporations who wish to hush up their dodgy activities or perhaps politicians who are fiddling their expenses, does cause me some concern. Let us not forget that Speaker Michael Martin spent over £20,000 of taxpayer money in an attempt to challenge and therefore silence the press over negative stories about MP expenses. While saying that I do appreciate that an injunction and super injunction have to have a good case before being granted - as in the case of the professional footballer discussed above!!!!!!!!! Now what exactly could that case have been??

greenman


Joined: 16/02/2008
Posts: 526

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 19:19

For those interested, Ryan Giggs has now been publicly named in Parliament and the British media, including the BBC at 5pm.

Lilli



Joined: 21/07/2008
Posts: 13081

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 19:28

MsGranett I dont think it was just their base desires, now cheque book hacks will come into it, she will make a fortune. greenman yes makes you wonder what does get covered up x

Pugwash


Joined: 06/09/2010
Posts: 1797

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 19:30

Ms Garnett, not sure we should blame the "bimbo" Mr Giggs is the one that has now ruined his reputation.

Jeannie


Joined: 04/08/2009
Posts: 3283

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 19:53

Leaving the subject of super injunctions, etc. aside for a moment, what I find difficult to comprehend is that Ryan Giggs, a highly respected (until now) player with both fellow sportsmen and fans alike, could risk throwing away his home life, wife and children.



I feel I have been naive in thinking he was a credit to football in more ways than one, although I realise I am only one in many thousands.



I think he's been an absolute fool, and for what? A roll in the hay with some silly (or is she?) little bimbo (and I'm being polite with that one).

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 20:03

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



all a bit academic now..

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 20:07

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13509868



if you can see it ..

MsGarnet


Joined: 04/01/2009
Posts: 989

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 20:09

Greenman - I agree with all you say - but hasn't there always been one rule for the rich and one for the poor? We will never know what we don't know (if that makes sense) and Pugwash - I hold them 50:50 to blame - him for cheating on his wife and children and for being so arrogant he thought his bottomless pit of money could always cover it up and her, for having an affair with Ryan Giggs in the full knowledge he was married with children. These blokes who always think the grass is greener on the other side, only to find - when they get there - it isn't.........

deputydawg


Joined: 30/03/2010
Posts: 1727

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 20:17

Having named someone who sought the protection of the Courts there now ensues comment about misconduct. Have I missed something ? Has he made any admissions yet ? Do we know whether or not he was granted an injunction to give himself time to prepare a court action to defend himself against the damage of rumour ? As far as I am aware although mentioned under cover of parliamentary privilege the Court have not yet lifted the injunction. In the meantime if we are loyal members of the forum perhaps better to say nothing until the whole is known.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 20:22

MsGarnet



for someone with passionate beliefs on rape.. I'm somewhat surprised you have already decided on the 'blame'....



You MIGHT even BE right - but what if the named footie player DIDN'T partake of said fling ... ?!

Jeannie


Joined: 04/08/2009
Posts: 3283

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 20:44

Hi Mark



I sincerely hope you're right, although it does seem highly unlikely, don't you think?



Love to you both.



J

x

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 21:12

That's his knighthood out the window

I guess

Shame great sportsman

bobby21


Joined: 23/05/2011
Posts: 1

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 23:02

And the parody's start..



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdO8lxHoUBw

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
23/05/2011 23:17

Message 71. He's obviously great at a few things!

MsGarnet


Joined: 04/01/2009
Posts: 989

Message Posted:
24/05/2011 00:19

mx6 - Getting a super injunction proves Giggs has something to hide; having already cheated on his wife before they married (she threw him out, then took him back giving him one more chance) as a previously acknowledged cheat, and with Imogen Thomas's prior reputation, you couldn't be so naieve as to think this is not 100% correct as regards their having a sexual relationship. Thomas is NOT going to say on television and in every conceivable media outlet, she had an affair with a footballer, but was legally prevented from naming him, for Giggs name now, to be erroneous. As to having "decided on the blame" - I fail to see how I could be more equitable than apportioning it to them 50:50!!!!!!! Your polemical segue bringing up my thoughts on rape from another thread - which has NOTHING WHATSOEVER in any way shape or form, to do with THIS thread or its subject matter, is disingenuous and tacky. You have lost all credibility in my eyes as a debater.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
24/05/2011 02:36

>> Getting a super injunction proves [ the named PL player ] has something to hide <<



It 'proves' noting of the sort.. How do you arrive at such a conclusion ?



As to 'losing cred as a debater'.. I think you may have me confused as someone who might care what you think of me....



I *AM* more concerned with posters who can't / won't see anything ironic in their applying standards of 'conduct / guilt ' ..

MsGarnet


Joined: 04/01/2009
Posts: 989

Message Posted:
24/05/2011 03:15

mx6 - I was aware you don't give a damn as to anyone's opposing opinion, past threads/posts from months back show that; I was telling you what I thought anyway, because like you, I also have people whose opinion is meaningless to me, but in my case, they are the ones for whom I have no respect, or who have lost my respect. For those I respect, I listen to their beliefs, and either change my mind, or keep to my original thought whilst still respecting them and their right to totally disagree. I would also point out rape is a violation of the worst kind by one or more people, visited on another human, oftentimes destroying their lives, and their immediate family, for ever; so not germane to this thread. A married man and a trollop intentionally engaging in sexual relations is 100% consensual. The fact that innocent people again are damaged, oftentimes lifelong, is a sad by-product of the selfish behaviour of the two main protagonists. I won't ever have anything more to say to you.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
24/05/2011 09:48

MsGarnet



re 76



nice 'speech'.. was the " I won't have anything more to say to you" designed to avoid the 'awkward' question you clearly seek to avoid..? To repeat, you stated >> Getting a super injunction proves [ the named PL player ] has something to hide <<



I asked you HOW it [ taking out the injunction ] proved anything? ... you merely repeated your 'character assessment' of the footballer and his alleged mistress.



Oh, by the way I DO 'give a damn about' many posters viewpoints - even those I strongly disagree with... I'm sure you'll figure it out.....

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
24/05/2011 10:03

Why could we not have outed him in the TRNC?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
24/05/2011 10:51

Troodo



re msg 78



How do you KNOW he needs 'outing' ? !

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
24/05/2011 20:17

What a career. He's been in 7 Fa Cup finals, 3 Champions League finals and 1 Big Brother Quarter Finalist.

philbailey


Joined: 17/01/2011
Posts: 3534

Message Posted:
24/05/2011 20:25

And now



from bbc news



Cars belonging to journalists and photographers camped outside the home of Manchester United footballer Ryan Giggs have been vandalised.



A group of masked men pulled up in a transit van to the street in Worsley, Salford, and attacked six vehicles.