Giggsy the (not so) super injunction footballer has just been outed on Sky News - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Giggsy the (not so) super injunction footballer has just been outed on Sky News

£0.00 @
Tsssk ! Read More
tallpete33 Avatar
6y, 1d agoPosted 6 years, 1 day ago
Tsssk !
tallpete33 Avatar
6y, 1d agoPosted 6 years, 1 day ago
Options

All Comments

(25) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
beaten by a minute
4 Likes #2
Serves him right (_;)
#3
munnski
Serves him right (_;)


Absolutely!
#4
what happened?
#5
garbage456
what happened?


http://tinyurl.com/3dz2g9p
1 Like #6
garbage456
what happened?

He was caught offside with imogen

Edited By: no1john on May 23, 2011 17:22
2 Likes #7
munnski
Serves him right (_;)


Agreed but she doesn't deserve to make a penny out of this. Affair with a married man, what was she expecting? It’s disgraceful the amount of publicity she has/will receive from this
1 Like #8
Ryan giggs is sueing twitter.... Can't imogen why!!!!!
#9
Laughable really that breaking news is such old news.
#10
Don't make me feel any less towards him like. He is still every bit a legend to many people. Didn't do becks too much harm did it??
banned#11
WoolyM
Laughable really that breaking news is such old news.


The fact that it's Ryan Giggs isn't the breaking news.
#12
whats wrong with dipping your stick in a different pond every now and then lol
#13
no1john
garbage456
what happened?


He was caught offside with imogen


i know that i meant about the sky mentioning it.
#14
he was wrong, she was wrong but why is she saying she has been badly treated, is it that she wanted more money.
#15
Still a legend in my eyes! But a tw*t for trying to sue Twitter! Should of kept it in his pants.
banned 3 Likes #16
Great footballer yes but ......Adulterer extraordinaire who wants to spend a small fortune hiding behind his money, tut tut tut should have been a real man and come out and pleading guilty rather all this nonsense.

Playing happy families this past week is disgusting, I feel so sorry for his wife for what she has been through and now has to relive it all over again and face far more embarrassment than any previous wag has had to.

Maybe Colleen Rooney can lend a shoulder to cry on, she has been here a few times herself. These footballers need to realise the shame they bring to their families when they do this, they are the ones punished not the footballer.
#17
extremely retarded to think he could actually sucessfully sue twitter!

Maybe he should have googled the Streisand Effect

Edited By: jayjayuk1234 on May 23, 2011 19:01
[mod] 10 Likes #19
hodgester


X)

http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg612/scaled.php?tn=0&server=612&filename=wcylz.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640
1 Like #20
we all make mistakes, this is inexcusable to a certain point as we dont know the full ins and outs of this marriage. But imogen is worse than Ryan in my eyes. She must have known he was married but went with him anyway for over 9 months. And then she wants to sell he story because he broke it off and she has no means to support herself..... the tart!

if i was married Giggs can sleep with my wife and i would blame her not him lol.......But in all seriousness these things happen all the time and im sure while hes trying to patch things up at home he doesnt need the press and the rest of the world to be commenting on it too......just like i amd doing now :D
banned 1 Like #21
This poster on another forum sums it all up quite well....

A few points from me (although I have to be careful what I say as I'm bound by the Court order).

This isn't a super-injunction. We can tell this as there's a public judgment in the case.

Secondly, the reason for the injunction is to prevent disclosure of information before there is a trial; this is partly to reduce damage done by an disclose if it is found to be unlawful (i.e. safer to not tell and then find out you can, than tell and then be sued for damages), and partly to protect all parties' right to a fair trial.

Thirdly, these things may not be cheap (costing £10k-60k), but they're considerably cheaper than an actual privacy trial (in the Mosley case, News Group Newspapers ended up paying £420k in costs). Yes, the law is expensive, but injunctions are comparatively cheap.

Fourthly, the lawsuit against Twitter is (likely) hoping to identify a particular user who started all this fuss a couple of weeks ago; there is good reason to believe that they were directly linked to one of the big newspapers. This isn't about going after random people on the Internet, this is making sure that newspapers aren't circumventing court orders for their own gain.

The really sad thing is that the press have managed to twist this case so it is "a good thing" for people to invade someone's privacy. This case isn't in the news because an injunction was granted (in circumstances the judge described as "blackmail"), but because our newspapers have found it to be a great opportunity to both attack the UK's law on privacy (which gets in their way of splashing the intimate details of people's lives across their front pages), and attack the Internet and social media (both encapsulated in a Daily Mail headline "vile online lies only spread because judges are suppressing the truth", which referred to "irresponsible" "Twitter rogues").

Also, I imagine some newspapers are keen to distract people from the fact that they are in serious trouble for contempt of court over previous reporting, or for illegally hacking into the phones of celebrities, politicians and the relatives of murder victims.
banned#22
Completely agree with what the person wrote Slamdunkin.
banned#23
He will get hounded and his family will get hounded by the press for what he has done in way of the adultery, the super injunction, the court action to sue twitter and 75,000 or more unknown people. The guy is an idiot and has gone about everything the wrong way.

Not sure how she can be worse than him when he has a wife and family to consider in this, she doesn't.
banned#24
Kon It's highly unlickly he is try to sue Twitter....much more probable that he is seeking a legal cause of action for twitter to hand over the identity or IP of the first whistleblower.

ALL UK law firms specialising in privacy laws will be aware of the new speech act that came into effect recently in the U.S making a damages case against twitter nigh on imposable.
#25
team to face Barcelona has been revealed
Van Der Sar

Fabio
Ferdinand
Vidic
Evra

Valencia
Carrick
An unnamed Premier League footballer
Park

Rooney
Hernandez

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!