A story doing the rounds many years ago was that Schofield was grooming an 11 year old boy and they were in a relationship. A super injunction was in place. My missus has been telling me this for several years, so,was,quite triumphant with the recent news. It’s obvious that there is more to it than what has come out so far, so I suspect the original story is likely true.
Why didn't we see the same media frenzy when Cheryl and Liam Payne came out as a couple, given she first met him on X-Factor when he was 14? (He got booted out at judges houses that year, but came back a couple of years later when One Direction was formed.)
A new level of odiousnessness reached this morning. I suspect that there aren't enough Vomit Face emojis in the world...
The super injunction story wasn't true, it remains to be seen if anything else was, nobody involved has claimed he's done anything other than abuse his position to get into some lads pants (there's a reasonable chance he was underage, but nobody is claiming it at the moment). Personally, I never liked him as a presenter and never watched anything he was on, but even I'm getting a bit bored of seeing him getting an online lynching for something nobody involved actually claimed happened.
Holls is back from her hols and is a bit sad 'cos Pip lied to her but it's better now 'cos some soppy tart rubbed her hand and everyone looked sad but also sorry. It's just so, so, very, very sad.
I didn't see it live (thank god) but heard clips from it late this aft when listening to Talk Radio. Jeez. It's pathetic. Made it sound like it was some humanitarian disaster that had happened. Talk about being out of touch with the real world. Listened for a while but had to switch channels.
You sound very confident, Isn’t the point about a super injunction that the public aren’t aware of it? I’m bored of it, but what I’ve heard so far is that the story smacks of people knowing something but aren’t allowed to say (though I am coming from an angle of believing there is more to it)
I read an interview where Schofield has said that there isn't an injunction, which made me wonder if he was lying, and one was in place, by denying it has he made it null and void as it effectively gives permission for people to speak out.
How can you be certain though? Whole point of a super injunction is that the injunction is concealed from the public as existing in the first place.
Every paper has been full of details of what he's been up to, it would be a fairly **** super-injunction if everyone had ignored it and printed the story anyway. Also, as Dutch has pointed out, once he'd claimed that he'd never taken out a super-injunction, the papers could go public if he was lying and they haven't. It would also be rather daft to go all the trouble of obtaining a super-injunction and then do a TV interview admitting to the thing the super-injunction was supposedly taken out to keep quiet.
How and why does parliament get involved? ITV to face some parliamentary committee or other, they should get on with government things.
A super-injuction taken out in England, only applies to England and Wales, not Scotland for example which has it's own newspapers
