Seabag Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 Note to self 'read the thread' Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987726 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 Salsaboy Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> Vern & Tess.Yes... star-bob-star already shone a light on that one... Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987798 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabag Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 This is like that game where you wear a post-it on your forehead. Only this time you CAN'T out yourselfOk, so here goesDo I play a piano and the pink oboe? Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987831 Share on other sites More sharing options...
nxjen Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 Well, "whoever" it is, they're still clinging onhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36081635 Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987873 Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcam Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 Quite. I just don't get the prurient interest in this. I don't think any laws have been broken. Unless they have, or there is great comedy value, I don't have even the remotest interest in the sex lives of celebrities. They're not politicians.alice Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> People over 21 have sex. so. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987874 Share on other sites More sharing options...
nxjen Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 The "Streisand Effect" has been quoted a lot regarding this, i.e. in general most people aren't that interested or particularly want to know what happened UNTIL steps are taken to prevent us from knowing. "Somebody" is just digging a deeper hole for himself. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987880 Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Bob* Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 A salient lesson in how taking out an injunction to stop people looking at something that they probably weren't that interested in looking at will - sure as eggs - lead to everyone immediately wanting to look. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987884 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabag Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 Oh dear, it's all a bit messyBut fark, it's not 'if' this kinda thing is going to leak out, it's whenDo showbiz people live in a bubble, I suppose they do somewhat And yeah, after a very short while on Twitter you'll see their namesStill, I'm sure there'll be a Hello magazine type renewing of vows in the not to distant future 😳 Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987885 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl Aelfheah Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 I agree that by taking out an injunction they have made it a much bigger story. I do have some sympathy with them however, in that this really isn't something which the press should have been publishing in the first place. It is a total invasion of privacy and potentially quite damaging to their family. I don't buy the argument that there is any public interest angle. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987901 Share on other sites More sharing options...
nxjen Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 Just remembered there's some history here which puts it in a different light. Public interest or vindictiveness? Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987909 Share on other sites More sharing options...
???? Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 Am I the only one whose interested in naked wrestling in an olive oil filled paddling pool then? Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987932 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl Aelfheah Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 Is that an offer quids? Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-987939 Share on other sites More sharing options...
???? Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 :) Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-988032 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salsaboy Posted April 19, 2016 Author Share Posted April 19, 2016 I'm in, if it's between Quids and Rahrahrah.???? Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> Am I the only one whose interested in naked> wrestling in an olive oil filled paddling pool> then? Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-988077 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabag Posted April 20, 2016 Share Posted April 20, 2016 I got it now (duh!) it's a damage limitation excercise EVERYONE knows who this is, and if you don't, then you were never interested or cared anyway, so that's you parked upThe big fella buys a million quid's worth of time, via an injunction of no use other than to stave of the inevitable 'publicity'Meanwhile, it's common knowledge on 'internet' but not in news print/website of UK media By the time 'it can be published' it's old 'yeah boring' news and barely 'page 4-5' newsFireworks pissed on, and we move on Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-988212 Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveR Posted April 20, 2016 Share Posted April 20, 2016 The injunction is only an interim stage anyway. If there wasn't a decent case that reporting the story was (in law) wrong they would never have got an injunction in the first place, so even if this goes expect the case to go on, with a claim for big damages in the event that they print the story. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-988399 Share on other sites More sharing options...
nxjen Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 Bearing in mind Seabag's analysishttp://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/may/19/supreme-court-upholds-celebrity-threesome-injunctionWhatever Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-999470 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salsaboy Posted May 19, 2016 Author Share Posted May 19, 2016 Who cares. Old news now. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/102317-sleb-injunctions/page/2/#findComment-999742 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now