A judge has lifted a gagging order taken out by footballer John Terry to prevent details of his ALLEGED affair with a team-mate’s girlfriend being reported in the media.
Should Terry be entitled to privacy about this,or is it something that the public should be entitled to know of ?
By: Sky High - 30th January 2010 at 07:20
I really couldn’t be less interested. Anyone, in the public eye or out of it, takes a risk when they cheat on a partner. If they are in the public eye then the public will probably get to know. After all that’s what the rag-sheets are for, isn’t it?Peddling the juicy stories on the famous because that’s what their millions of readers want to read.
By: spitfireman - 30th January 2010 at 00:12
……….who cares?:confused:
By: BumbleBee - 29th January 2010 at 23:49
If he were in a public position where it was an essential part of the job that he was known to be trustworthy,then I could see the point of exposing any suspicions of an affair.But he’s a footballer,for goodness’ sake.What does it matter if he ALLEGEDLY cheats on his wife ?
In the same vein,what does it matter if Tiger Woods has been putting it about a bit ? Surely that’s only of concern to Mr. and Mrs. Woods and the various ladies involved.
Why do we need to know everything about everybody ?
By: BumbleBee - 29th January 2010 at 23:41
I’m so gullible …
It’s really mean to tease old ladies,you know.
By: Grey Area - 29th January 2010 at 23:36
Calm down, BumbleBee.
I was just winding you up. 😀
By: BumbleBee - 29th January 2010 at 23:26
What have I missed ? It’s the BBC website article so it must be true,mustn’t it ? All right I’ll bung it in then.
By: Grey Area - 29th January 2010 at 23:20
Agreed. He’s taken fame and fortune. He’s messed up id say it’s fair game.
Agreed here, too.
Once you place yourself in a position where you earn your living in the public domain, then you can’t reasonably expect to enjoy the same degree of privacy and anonymity as Joe Punter on the street. (Or on the Internet, for that matter.)
Maybe it shouldn’t be that way, but that’s certainly how it is.
And I’m perfectly sure that BumbleBee had every intention of including the word “allegedly” in her first sentence, and that its omission was an innocent oversight on her part……
…….M’lud. 😎
By: BumbleBee - 29th January 2010 at 23:19
Being female my first reaction would be to say that he’s a cheating rat who deserves to be exposed,particularly as the judge suggested that Terry was acting more to protect his sponsorship deals than out of consideration for his wife and children.
On the other hand,isn’t everyone entitled to make a mistake in their private life without the world and his wife knowing about it ? Who does it benefit to plaster it all over the papers ?
By: SOFTLAD - 29th January 2010 at 23:09
Agreed. He’s taken fame and fortune. He’s messed up id say it’s fair game.
By: Scouse - 29th January 2010 at 23:05
Not an easy call, but I’d go for openness all the time unless there was an absolutely overwhelming need to keep it secret. Even though in this particular case you might not care very much for the newspaper in question, I don’t reckon sparing his blushes is sufficient reason for imposing secrecy legally, especially as it seems to be common knowledge in football anyway.
Just my opinion.
Sign In
January 29, 2010 at 10:16 pm