Nearly said it!

[lynbrown]

On Today on Radio 4 this morning, the chap talking about the super injuctions started to say the football players name. He covered it up, but to anyone still unaware of who this person is, it was a real giveaway.

[boxtops]

We were told his initials too..... or rather "the footballer is only known by his initials" and the news item said what they were.

[lynbrown]

I never heard that bit, are you sure? maybe it was on another program.

[boxtops]

Definitely - I only listen to Radio 4. Might have been on the News rather than the Today prog.

[Calibax]

The initials given are a random set of letters assigned by the court as an identifier but bear no relation to the person's real initials

[samak]

This has got absolutely nothing to do with this thread but I'm looking forward to seeing Ryan Giggs play against Barcelona next weekend.

[Old_Geezer]

This has got absolutely nothing to do with this thread but I like ice-cream.

[sandyRoe]

Is it right that the names of innocent people are being besmirched in order that the 'guilty' go unreported?
Jemima Khan has denied being the lady who took out a super injunction to prevent knowledge of an affair with Clarkeson becoming public. Why should she draw the flak while Clarksons lover hides?

[Old_Geezer]

IMO the test should be less of the "does the public have a right to know this", and more of, "do the authorities have a right to keep the public in the dark about this". I'm a great advocate for privacy, but if you do something indiscrete and it is known by those not involved, then it is already public knowledge. There should be a better reason that the individuals involved wantng to keep it quiet for a block being placed on the common people knowing about it. Is national security involved ?

[netibiza]

samak, is it my imogen or are you having a giggle??

[anagram]

"does the public have a right to know this" or alternatively...does the public even care?

[karenmac60]

And what about Hugh Bonneville's super injunction - who even knows who he is????

[mike11111]

I haven't been following this, but a Real Giveaway sort of gives a clue.

Hugh Bonneville is Lord Grantham in Downton Abbey. No doubt Her Ladyship the Dowager Countess (Maggie Smith) will have something to say on the matter when she finds out!

[karenmac60]

I know who he is Mike, but he's not really famous enough to warrant a super injunction is he?

[mike11111]

Fame, or the lack of it, should not be a consideration when deciding to issue an injunction or not.

[karenmac60]

But surely that is the whole point of the super injunction - it is a form of protection that us mere mortals cannot afford.

[mike11111]

I would not have thought that money played a part in this, except of course for affording the court fees in the first place. Clearly, given the prominence of the internet such injunctions are of limited value. Three years ago a servant in the royal household was tried for blackmail after alleging that he had performed an oral sex act on a minor member of the Royal Family. The courts ruled that the identity of the said royal could not be revealed, but anyone who went on to an American website would have learned instantly who it was.

[karenmac60]

True, but that doesn't stop the rich taking these things out. Incidentally - I have asked you a question on CB.

[mike11111]

I have replied on said thread. I do not wish to initiate a discussion but thought that you deserved the courtesy of a reply as I obviously did not make my feelings known correctly in the original post.

[karenmac60]

Your feelings are still unclear