Spoof from Tomorrows Express !

PeterMac wrote:Don't know the origin of this.
But it hits the nail on the head.

" />

scotuk wrote:It's from this weeks "Private Eye"

DIBarlow wrote:
Very interesting if so.

Something must have changed and that something must be "behind the scenes".

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

DIBarlow wrote:
Very interesting if so.

Something must have changed and that something must be "behind the scenes".

Though I found it very amusing, I don't think it changes much.  This is an attack on the Express, not the McCanns.

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

DIBarlow wrote:
Very interesting if so.

Something must have changed and that something must be "behind the scenes".

Though I found it very amusing, I don't think it changes much.  This is an attack on the Express, not the McCanns.

Okeydokey wrote:
Hislop will NEVER criticise the McCanns for reasons best known to him and possibly the usual reasons associated with someone from a traditional military background.

DIBarlow wrote:

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

DIBarlow wrote:
Very interesting if so.

Something must have changed and that something must be "behind the scenes".

Though I found it very amusing, I don't think it changes much.  This is an attack on the Express, not the McCanns.

Oh it's an attack on the Express, granted, but implicating 'Madeleine McCann' 'Maddy' and 'Maddy Tup' in the article would not appear to endear Private Eye to Carter Ruck in any shape or form.
One can imagine the Pink one frothing at the mouth at the insolence of this rag. He controlled the media you know.....

plebgate wrote:

DIBarlow wrote:

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

DIBarlow wrote:
Very interesting if so.

Something must have changed and that something must be "behind the scenes".

Though I found it very amusing, I don't think it changes much.  This is an attack on the Express, not the McCanns.

Oh it's an attack on the Express, granted, but implicating 'Madeleine McCann' 'Maddy' and 'Maddy Tup' in the article would not appear to endear Private Eye to Carter Ruck in any shape or form.
One can imagine the Pink one frothing at the mouth at the insolence of this rag. He controlled the media you know.....

Spot on I think, also agree with PeterM about Hislop being threatened with imprisonment if he is found guilty of libel (again).

Ladyinred wrote:

plebgate wrote:

DIBarlow wrote:

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

DIBarlow wrote:
Very interesting if so.

Something must have changed and that something must be "behind the scenes".

Though I found it very amusing, I don't think it changes much.  This is an attack on the Express, not the McCanns.

Oh it's an attack on the Express, granted, but implicating 'Madeleine McCann' 'Maddy' and 'Maddy Tup' in the article would not appear to endear Private Eye to Carter Ruck in any shape or form.
One can imagine the Pink one frothing at the mouth at the insolence of this rag. He controlled the media you know.....

Spot on I think, also agree with PeterM about Hislop being threatened with imprisonment if he is found guilty of libel (again).

I think all forum members should buy this edition of Private Eye to show our support!

ultimaThule wrote:8-page pull out?  TB will be the star of a hefty special weekend supplement  - with a lecture tour to follow   

PeterMac wrote:

Okeydokey wrote:
Hislop will NEVER criticise the McCanns for reasons best known to him and possibly the usual reasons associated with someone from a traditional military background.

He has been 'promised' a sentence of immediate imprisonment if he is ever found guilty of libel again.

And knowing the way in which C-R managed to get TB sentenced, even though no libel was ever proved, he would do well to remain silent, but keep the filing cabinet full, ready for the 8 page pull out

Okeydokey wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

Okeydokey wrote:
Hislop will NEVER criticise the McCanns for reasons best known to him and possibly the usual reasons associated with someone from a traditional military background.

He has been 'promised' a sentence of immediate imprisonment if he is ever found guilty of libel again.

And knowing the way in which C-R managed to get TB sentenced, even though no libel was ever proved, he would do well to remain silent, but keep the filing cabinet full, ready for the 8 page pull out

"Promised" by whom?

Okeydokey wrote:
Hislop will NEVER criticise the McCanns for reasons best known to him and possibly the usual reasons associated with someone from a traditional military background.
He has been 'promised' a sentence of immediate imprisonment if he is ever found guilty of libel again.

"Promised" by whom?

Judicial career
As a judge, Eady was known for having judged many high-profile libel cases. The journalist and commentator Quentin Letts called him "the High Court's favourite libel judge".[1] According to The Times, Eady "has delivered a series of rulings that have bolstered privacy laws and encouraged libel tourism".One commentator said that "he has interpreted the European Convention on Human Rights in a restrictive way. In effect he is developing a privacy law.  He has also been repeatedly criticised by Private Eye on similar grounds.
The Daily Telegraph described him as "something of an enigma to his colleagues. He has a reputation for being distant and sometimes difficult in court, but can be immensely charming off duty."[3] In April 2008, The Times commented, "He may be just one of more than 100 High Court judges but Sir David Eady is nonetheless arguably more influential than any of his colleagues. Almost single-handedly he is creating new privacy law."

Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre was particularly critical of Eady. In a November 2008 article he accused the judge of "arrogant and amoral judgments", and went on to complain that
“ [W]hile London boasts scores of eminent judges, one man is given a virtual monopoly of all cases against the media, enabling him to bring in a privacy law by the back door. The freedom of the press is far too important to be left to the somewhat desiccated values of a single judge who clearly has an animus against the popular press and the right of people to freedom of expression.
Dacre was also particularly critical of Eady's ruling in the Max Mosley case, describing it as a frightening example of what "one judge with a subjective and highly relativist moral sense can do ... with a stroke of his pen". The Daily Mail also accused Eady of "moral and social nihilism" and "arrogance". According to unnamed "friends" of Eady cited in The Guardian, Eady has been "profoundly hurt" by these attacks.    

In April 2011, Eady faced press criticism following a case in which he granted a restraining order contra mundum ("against the world") in OPQ v BJM, creating a worldwide and permanent ban on publication of details about an individual's private life.

Okeydokey wrote:Nowhere do I find any reference to Hislop being promised with prison if he commits libel again.

Bishop Brennan wrote:

Okeydokey wrote:Nowhere do I find any reference to Hislop being promised with prison if he commits libel again.

Well, perhaps not "promised", but certainly flirting with it...  

This from Wikipedia:

"Possibly the most famous litigation case against the magazine was initiated by James Goldsmith (known within Private Eye's pages as '(Sir) Jammy Fishpaste'[28][29]), who managed to arrange for criminal libel charges to be brought (effectively meaning that, if found guilty, those behind the Eye could be imprisoned). He sued over allegations that members of the Clermont Set, including Goldsmith, had conspired to shelter Lord Lucan after Lucan had murdered his family nanny, Sandra Rivett. Goldsmith won a partial victory and eventually reached a settlement with the magazine. The case threatened to bankrupt the magazine, which turned to its readers for financial support in the form of the Goldenballs Fund. Goldsmith himself was referred to as Jaws. The solicitor involved in many litigation cases against Private Eye, including the Goldsmith case, was Peter Carter-Ruck (or "Carter-Fuck", as the Eye referred to him).[30]"

After that near-miss, you can understand him being careful around another potential murder case, especially with the McCanns retaining the self-same libel laywers as those used by Goldsmith.

PeterMac wrote:Don't know the origin of this.
But it hits the nail on the head.

" />

Okeydokey wrote:
There is no prospect of a successful prosecution for criminal libel in this day and age and reproducing, without comment,  official files that have been made freely available in a fellow EU country would not constitute libel.

PeterMac wrote:Don't know the origin of this.
But it hits the nail on the head.

" />