The Guessing Game Continues
Blogosphere has been busy speculating the identities of the 2 England footballers who obtained super-injunctions recently to protect their privacy. Now a third England footballer has joined them in getting a sujper-injunction. And critics continue to protest that super-injunctions are crippling a free press and preventing freedom of speech.
The Third Super-Injunction
High Court judge Mr Justice Kenneth Parker granted a super-injunction to a third England footballer in recent weeks to prevent the press or anyone else from revealing about the private life of that footballer.
This footballer went to court to seek privacy protection after he lost his mobile phone. Stored inside that phone were compromising pictures involving the footballer. It seems that whoever stole the phone decided to offer these photographs to various national newspapers.
In the High Court last Friday, an order was granted to the footballer to prevent the media from publishing stories of him in a “sexual liaison, encounter or relationship”. This ban was in relation to “private or personal photographs” on his phone.
Reactions
That celebrities like these rich England footballers seem able to obtain super-injunctions to gag the media has alarmed many people, including MPs and others. Many feel that these celebrities should have used libel courts to challenge stories about their private lives, including their sexual activities rather than to hide under the super-injunctions.
Earlier a spokesman for the Newspaper Society said concerning super-injunctions: “Prior restraint is one of the strongest ways of controlling and restricting freedom of expression. Matters of real public concern can be suppressed.”
The John Terry Super-Injunction
Chelsea FC captain John Terry obtained a super-injunction last January when a newspaper was about to publish details about his affairs with Vanessa Perroncel, wife of his best friend and former Chelsea colleague, Wayne Bridge. A judge later lifted that super-injunction and the press went all out to publish his affairs with Vanessa Perroncel.
That revelation cost John Terry his England capataincy, and almost wrecked his marriage. Recently, Vanessa Perroncel, who was in the middle of the failed John Terry super-injunction said: ”So why should these people then be allowed to cherry pick what the newspapers write about them? I know how expensive it is to take out an injunction, and it’s not fair that footballers should be allowed to protect themselves because of their money.”
Think About It
Why indeed is it so easy for celebrities with money to obtain super-injunctions? Wouldn’t the very fact that they choose to apply for super-injunctions imply they have something to hide? More specifically wouldn’t it imply that what the press may be about to publish are true? If the stories are false, wouldn’t these celebrities sue the press for libel?
Previous post
judges shouldn’t be allowed to authorize super injunctions