Who they are, no one knows, since the injunction stops newspapers reporting on whom they are, yet the other person involved is left in the shit because she/he can’t name that person, and has to deal with the backlash of the public against them, on their own.
Imogen Thomas, former Big Brother contestant, is currently in the middle of a super injunction with a married footballer, who is being protected by the order, where she is made to deal with it by herself. I do feel sorry for her, yet she should have never gotten involved with him nor should he have cheated on his wife with her.
Appearing on This Morning, she told Phillip Schofield and Ruth Langsford that she “had no intention of ever speaking about the man – I just wish that my name was protected. I didn’t have £50,000 to get an injunction.”
She then went on to say “’I feel like I have been thrown to the lions and told to “deal with it”.
As a journalism student with my journalistic mind switched on, I would desperately want to publish the names of all those who have protected their name, and publish what they are trying to hide. As a journalist, it’s newsworthy and it humiliates that person. Yes, it will hurt their family if the truth came out but that is their own fault, if they had just kept their dick in their pants then they wouldn’t have to be getting a gagging order against newspapers.
In my normal mindset, I think that it’s the public’s interest to let us know who these people are. Celebrities are said to be role models to the young, and the old, but how can they be role models when they are out there cheating on their wife’s/girlfriends/boyfriends and then wanting to protect themselves before the truth comes out.
Let’s take the John Terry affair as an example. He was accused of cheating on his wife, with his former best friend’s girlfriend. He had an injunction against the News of the World, which was later overturned as the Judge decided that Terry was more interested in making sure the sponsors didn’t find out about the affair, than if his family found out.
As a role model for young children, he wasn’t setting a very good example. His captaincy was taken away from him and he was dropped by his sponsors. The world seemed to despise him and only now a year later, is he slowly climbing back up the social ladder with his captaincy being given back to him.
And it seems I’m not the only one who believes that the orders should be overturned and we, the public, should know who they are.
Prime Minister David Cameron has said “it is for Parliament to decide the balance between privacy and press freedom.”
After attacking the Judges for granting injections to celebrities and even publicist Max Clifford labelled the order as “A privacy law for the rich.”
So is this what this country had come to? Celebrities being granted injunctions just to protect their integrity and private life? Wanting to protect their name from the public because they will be hated if everyone found out?
I must say, I agree with our Prime Minister, that the Government should have the say if celebrities should be granted injunctions as in the last few months, there have been many stories about the amount of injunctions that have been granted, and even so, there are many more gagging orders that no one knows about.
I, for one, am really intrigued over who the Footballer is in the Imogen Thomas case, as are many football fans and although there has been one recurring name from the Manchester United team that I have heard and read, I guess we will never know who took out an injunction unless he reveals himself.
As my mother said “I don’t care who the player is, as long as he plays to top form on the pitch that is all I care about.”