Please or to access all these features

News

“Mystery” Male Celebrity Loses Injunction Bid

185 replies

CaveMum · Today 14:48

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqglwjdgg045o

The celebrity has lost his bid for a permanent injunction to prevent The Guardian and ITN from publishing allegations that he abused his status to attempt or attempt to engage in “inappropriate sexual activities with a large number of girls and young women.”

There remains a temporary injunction preventing him from being named in order to allow an appeal against the judgement.

The Royal Courts of Justice building in London, showing the front part of the building with its intricate stonework and an ornate window.

Celebrity loses injunction bid but will stay anonymous pending appeal

The unnamed man asked for an injunction to stop his identity being reported in connection with allegations against him.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqglwjdgg045o

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
XDownwiththissortofthingX · Today 19:51

YourAmplePlumPoster · Today 19:45

I can tell you from personal experience as mother of a former sectioned patient that a private facility doesn't have the legal power to do this without the permission of a legal entity or the NHS. There is reference to a secure unit which almost certainly means an NHS unit. He is in a secure NHS unit which means his mental health is very serious indeed. The NHS uses private mental health facilities if they don't have beds in the public hospitals but it is overseen by the NHS.

The judgement seems to imply it is indeed an NHS facility, and given PPT has been able to supply supporting evidence from ten individual doctors that he has suffered life-long poor mental health, including multiple detentions and suicide attempts, then I see no reason whatsoever to doubt the claims made about his mental state, or any reason to imply he's hamming it up or attempting to "play the mental health card".

That isn't what's fundamentally dishonest about this action. It's the notion that he has a legal right to be protected from his own thoughts and feelings arising from his past behaviours. That is ridiculous, and a blatant attempt from his legal team to have certain Human Rights law misinterpreted and misapplied. I'm relieved the Judge saw through it and rejected it, and I can only hope the appeal fails.

LlynTegid · Today 20:00

LizzieSiddal · Today 19:23

Have you been following the recent Russell Brand case, closely? Have you read the questions the Defence barristers have put to the victims? Or what the Defence barristers said about these women in the summing up?
If not go and have a read then come back and explain why you think the vast majority of women who are sexually abused, never go to the police.
Until we change the court system, women have every right to put their stores to journalists because they aren’t going to get justice in this country.

A lot of victims might feel they are the only one, and if they discover they are one of many, may be more likely to go to the police, even years later.

StasisMom · Today 20:02

gmgnts · Today 17:42

Were he alive Saville would have been prosecuted and jailed.
But the point is, he wasn't prosecuted despite his appalling behaviour being an open secret in media circles for years. The current case is a celeb doing the same kind of things as Saville - again an open secret - but trying to find a way to wriggle out of facing the music. Rest assured, Saville would have pulled exactly the same kind of stunt had he still been alive.

Sorry not RTFT but will forget if I don’t post now - is he really on a level with JS?!

HorseandHeron · Today 20:02

piscofrisco · Today 14:49

Well I think it’s easy to guess who it is 🤷🏽‍♀️

According to DH, not him at all but a very different celeb who is indeed pretty horrible behind the scenes (I had dealings with said celeb but had no idea that they were sleazy just nasty and entitled.)

bobiwien · Today 20:04

Supersimkin7 · Today 16:29

I feel for him, he’s very ill, but he couldn’t win or everyone would try it.

No sign he’s anything but a sleaze. Is anything going to court bar confidentiality?

The alleged allegations state women and GIRLS

bobiwien · Today 20:04

HorseandHeron · Today 20:02

According to DH, not him at all but a very different celeb who is indeed pretty horrible behind the scenes (I had dealings with said celeb but had no idea that they were sleazy just nasty and entitled.)

You’re ‘DH’ is wrong.

TheFriendlyCabbage · Today 20:05

He absconded from the secure hospital on one occasion.

northernbarbie · Today 20:09

HorseandHeron · Today 20:02

According to DH, not him at all but a very different celeb who is indeed pretty horrible behind the scenes (I had dealings with said celeb but had no idea that they were sleazy just nasty and entitled.)

It’s not guesswork as to who it is, his name has been confirmed in foreign media

SpottyAlpaca · Today 20:11

YourAmplePlumPoster · Today 17:50

Not that I support him but will everyone be pleased if he commits suicide?

He’s not going to do anything of the sort. He’s just trying to manipulate the legal process by pretending to be suicidal.

bobiwien · Today 20:11

bobiwien · Today 20:04

You’re ‘DH’ is wrong.

*Your

Calling · Today 20:12

YourAmplePlumPoster · Today 18:14

I'm just remembering the monstering of the bloke in that murder case, the landlord who turned out to be innocent. What if he'd commited suicide for something he didn't do? Everything is now trial by media. As we know Cliff Richard was innocent of accusations.

Ah, yes, Cliff Richard, indeed.

LlynTegid · Today 20:16

SpottyAlpaca · Today 20:11

He’s not going to do anything of the sort. He’s just trying to manipulate the legal process by pretending to be suicidal.

I am not so sure he is pretending, whilst agreeing he is trying to use it to silence the press.

If he were to end up being charged, and girls is a reference to under 18s, he would not have an easy time in prison. A convicted sex offender (former lead singer of the Lostprophets) was murdered in prison. The thought of that probably has affected his mental health.

ANEC · Today 20:16

LizzieSiddal · Today 19:23

Have you been following the recent Russell Brand case, closely? Have you read the questions the Defence barristers have put to the victims? Or what the Defence barristers said about these women in the summing up?
If not go and have a read then come back and explain why you think the vast majority of women who are sexually abused, never go to the police.
Until we change the court system, women have every right to put their stores to journalists because they aren’t going to get justice in this country.

I’m not condoning what the defence barristers say or do. They have a job to do and unfortunately it’s to try and put the accusers in a bad light.
I’m saying that until proven guilty the accused should have anonymity. I know that the CPS need to have a strong case before they proceed but occasionally cases are proved where the accuser has lied and some bloke has had his name dragged through the mud and mud sticks.

Fizbosshoes · Today 20:20

XDownwiththissortofthingX · Today 19:51

The judgement seems to imply it is indeed an NHS facility, and given PPT has been able to supply supporting evidence from ten individual doctors that he has suffered life-long poor mental health, including multiple detentions and suicide attempts, then I see no reason whatsoever to doubt the claims made about his mental state, or any reason to imply he's hamming it up or attempting to "play the mental health card".

That isn't what's fundamentally dishonest about this action. It's the notion that he has a legal right to be protected from his own thoughts and feelings arising from his past behaviours. That is ridiculous, and a blatant attempt from his legal team to have certain Human Rights law misinterpreted and misapplied. I'm relieved the Judge saw through it and rejected it, and I can only hope the appeal fails.

My previous post was based on a podcast released a few weeks ago so I stand corrected about the NHS treatment.

DrunkOnWater · Today 20:20

SpottyAlpaca · Today 20:11

He’s not going to do anything of the sort. He’s just trying to manipulate the legal process by pretending to be suicidal.

Like when Schofield mention killing himself. It’s manipulation, it’s what men like this are good at and rely on those around them falling for it. They’re sick.

UnwillingAdvocate · Today 20:20

What a kerfuffle!

“Mystery” Male Celebrity Loses Injunction Bid
HorseandHeron · Today 20:22

bobiwien · Today 20:04

You’re ‘DH’ is wrong.

I'm glad. Much as I disliked the celeb DH mentioned, he never came across as sleazy in that way, whereas the other one always did, even in the height of fame.

bobiwien · Today 20:27

HorseandHeron · Today 20:22

I'm glad. Much as I disliked the celeb DH mentioned, he never came across as sleazy in that way, whereas the other one always did, even in the height of fame.

David Jason?

YourAmplePlumPoster · Today 20:28

DrunkOnWater · Today 20:20

Like when Schofield mention killing himself. It’s manipulation, it’s what men like this are good at and rely on those around them falling for it. They’re sick.

I'm not sure that Schofield did anything unlawful other than hitting on a colleague who was of legal age.

KayFabe · Today 20:34

Calling · Today 20:12

Ah, yes, Cliff Richard, indeed.

Maybe he'll do a cover of Electronics "getting away with it" for xmas this year

YourAmplePlumPoster · Today 20:36

I'm just saying, if he tops himself is that a "win" for the internet, court of public justice, the journos, whatever. I am just remembering how the so called investigative journalists decided to cover up about Epstein and Covid coming from a lab in Wuhan. They are always keen to expose celebrities but not anything serious.

nidvideouioui · Today 20:37

Oh wait is this about Lara Stone’s ex then? 👀

squarecrow · Today 20:38

ANEC · Today 20:16

I’m not condoning what the defence barristers say or do. They have a job to do and unfortunately it’s to try and put the accusers in a bad light.
I’m saying that until proven guilty the accused should have anonymity. I know that the CPS need to have a strong case before they proceed but occasionally cases are proved where the accuser has lied and some bloke has had his name dragged through the mud and mud sticks.

I’m sorry but I think the wrongly accused are vastly outnumbered by the guilty-but-never-brought-to-justice.

KayFabe · Today 20:38

YourAmplePlumPoster · Today 20:28

I'm not sure that Schofield did anything unlawful other than hitting on a colleague who was of legal age.

He'd known the boy from 11 years old. At the very least there was grooming.

ConciseOxford · Today 20:44

I really hope his appeal does not succeed. We can’t have a system where predatory men do unspeakable things to young women and expect their privacy and anonymity to be respected. Just ‘no’.

Swipe left for the next trending thread