Message #2141

[ecuworrier]

Since I am not sure of the legal position on this, I won't name anyone, but with at least 2 names having come 'available' recently - both through being named in the Commons, not to mention Twitter, I thought a discussion on the nature and validity of injunctions was in order.  One 'name' seems to have tried hard to give us a picture of themselves as 'squeaky clean'; the other is known for their involvement in the financial world and the collapse of the bansk a couple of years ago.

Are either/both/neither of these cases of public interest, and what exactly - your view - counts as 'public interest'?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/may/26/ryan-giggs-affair-big-brother

nice of you to have picked up the giggs story (not giggs specifically but could have been a spurs player or anything

GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,