Nice one Giggsy @InjunctionSuper

http://twitter.com/#!/InjunctionSuper



I wonder if he will get the same treatment Ashley Cole gets.

Also LOL @ Jeremy Clarkson.

James ♠ wrote:http://twitter.com/#!/InjunctionSuper



I wonder if he will get the same treatment Ashley Cole gets.

Also LOL @ Jeremy Clarkson.

How accurate is this though? If he's a member of the press he can't actually say anyhting without being in contempt of court (which will land him jail time). So basically whoever this is they can't really be "in the know".

Laurencio wrote:

James wrote:http://twitter.com/#!/InjunctionSuper



I wonder if he will get the same treatment Ashley Cole gets.

Also LOL @ Jeremy Clarkson.

How accurate is this though? If he's a member of the press he can't actually say anyhting without being in contempt of court (which will land him jail time). So basically whoever this is they can't really be "in the know".

Nothing can be done over twitter.

I'm pretty sure it is accurate, the Giggs rumours where flying around last week and the week before last. This is also on lots top newspaper websites, I don't think they'd put it up if they werent sure

I dont think any put the link, they just made it really obvious on how to find it.

Giggsy's still got fire in his bell-end.

Can't say i care which famous person is shagging who

Radford11 wrote:Can't say i care which famous person is shagging who

Unless if you're shagging them.

Radford11 wrote:Can't say i care which famous person is shagging who

Don't think they should be allowed to hide it though.

James wrote:

Laurencio wrote:

James wrote:http://twitter.com/#!/InjunctionSuper



I wonder if he will get the same treatment Ashley Cole gets.

Also LOL @ Jeremy Clarkson.

How accurate is this though? If he's a member of the press he can't actually say anyhting without being in contempt of court (which will land him jail time). So basically whoever this is they can't really be "in the know".

Nothing can be done over twitter.

I'm pretty sure it is accurate, the Giggs rumours where flying around last week and the week before last. This is also on lots top newspaper websites, I don't think they'd put it up if they werent sure

I dont think any put the link, they just made it really obvious on how to find it.

Twitter was never meant to be completely anonymous though. If they are served a supena to reveal the account's owner they will probably do so.

I highly doubt this is put up by someone "in the know". I think it's just a collection of rumours tbh.

These injunctions where done in the UK. Twitter is based in the US.

It really isn't worth the effort, it would of all come out in a couple of months anyway, just like the Terry thing.

James ♠ wrote:These injunctions where done in the UK. Twitter is based in the US.

It really isn't worth the effort, it would of all come out in a couple of months anyway, just like the Terry thing.

Granted. I'm still sceptical.

Mal wrote:

Radford11 wrote:Can't say i care which famous person is shagging who

Unless if you're shagging them.

James wrote:
Don't think they should be allowed to hide it though.

No one should be allowed to hide the fact they are cheating etc but thousands of 'normal' husbands/wives still do. Basically it's not something the general public need to know.

Legally they could go after the thousands who retweeted it too.

Giggs

James ♠ wrote:These injunctions where done in the UK. Twitter is based in the US.

It really isn't worth the effort, it would of all come out in a couple of months anyway, just like the Terry thing.

I don't think it matters where Twitter is based. Where the person who Tweeted it is located is what is relevant, I believe.

It appears the rumour about Jezza and Jemima Khan is false. There is indeed an injuction with Khan's name on it, but according to this: http://twitter.com/#!/SuperInjBuster (the only thing that's even remotely professional about the matter as far as I can tell), and a few journalists it is not Jezza.

menalawyerguy wrote:

James ♠ wrote:These injunctions where done in the UK. Twitter is based in the US.

It really isn't worth the effort, it would of all come out in a couple of months anyway, just like the Terry thing.

I don't think it matters where Twitter is based. Where the person who Tweeted it is located is what is relevant, I believe.

The supena will have to be taken to the company, as they don't have the identity of the individuals. Since the company is based in the US the supena will have to be served in the US.

Mena I ever tell you I'm doing work experience at a law firm this week?

Laurencio wrote:It appears the rumour about Jezza and Jemima Khan is false. There is indeed an injuction with Khan's name on it, but according to this: http://twitter.com/#!/SuperInjBuster (the only thing that's even remotely professional about the matter as far as I can tell), and a few journalists it is not Jezza.

menalawyerguy wrote:

James ♠ wrote:These injunctions where done in the UK. Twitter is based in the US.

It really isn't worth the effort, it would of all come out in a couple of months anyway, just like the Terry thing.

I don't think it matters where Twitter is based. Where the person who Tweeted it is located is what is relevant, I believe.

The supena will have to be taken to the company, as they don't have the identity of the individuals. Since the company is based in the US the supena will have to be served in the US.

True. Unless the identity can be verified some other way.

GK01 wrote:Mena I ever tell you I'm doing work experience at a law firm this week?

No, you didn't. What type of stuff are they having you do? Good luck.

menalawyerguy wrote:

GK01 wrote:Mena I ever tell you I'm doing work experience at a law firm this week?

No, you didn't. What type of stuff are they having you do? Good luck.

Been working with the law clerk stuff when I'm not following a lawyer around

GK01 wrote:

menalawyerguy wrote:

GK01 wrote:Mena I ever tell you I'm doing work experience at a law firm this week?

No, you didn't. What type of stuff are they having you do? Good luck.

Been working with the law clerk stuff when I'm not following a lawyer around

That's good. You get more out of hands on experience (even if it's just sitting in an observing negotiations and depositions) than you get out of sitting in a law school classroom, imo. Well done.

menalawyerguy wrote:

GK01 wrote:

menalawyerguy wrote:

GK01 wrote:Mena I ever tell you I'm doing work experience at a law firm this week?

No, you didn't. What type of stuff are they having you do? Good luck.

Been working with the law clerk stuff when I'm not following a lawyer around

That's good. You get more out of hands on experience (even if it's just sitting in an observing negotiations and depositions) than you get out of sitting in a law school classroom, imo. Well done.

Only seen local civil court so far, one lawyers trying to get me into district court to see the robberies etc.

Yeah this thread needs to get back on topic

I agree.
Imogen is well fit,

Nice one Giggsy!

GK01 wrote:

menalawyerguy wrote:

GK01 wrote:

menalawyerguy wrote:

GK01 wrote:Mena I ever tell you I'm doing work experience at a law firm this week?

No, you didn't. What type of stuff are they having you do? Good luck.

Been working with the law clerk stuff when I'm not following a lawyer around

That's good. You get more out of hands on experience (even if it's just sitting in an observing negotiations and depositions) than you get out of sitting in a law school classroom, imo. Well done.

Only seen local civil court so far, one lawyers trying to get me into district court to see the robberies etc.

Yeah this thread needs to get back on topic

Maybe they can get Giggs as a client and prosecute his defamation case!

menalawyerguy wrote:

GK01 wrote:

menalawyerguy wrote:

GK01 wrote:

menalawyerguy wrote:

No, you didn't. What type of stuff are they having you do? Good luck.

Been working with the law clerk stuff when I'm not following a lawyer around

That's good. You get more out of hands on experience (even if it's just sitting in an observing negotiations and depositions) than you get out of sitting in a law school classroom, imo. Well done.

Only seen local civil court so far, one lawyers trying to get me into district court to see the robberies etc.

Yeah this thread needs to get back on topic

Maybe they can get Giggs as a client and prosecute his defamation case!

Yeah would be interesting that.

Fair play to Giggs shes fit as.
Jeremy Clarkson

James wrote:
Nothing can be done over twitter.

Ryan Babel and Carlton Cole say hi

Gegilworld93 wrote:

James wrote:
Nothing can be done over twitter.

Ryan Babel and Carlton Cole say hi

Bit different, they didn't do anything illegal, just stuff that pissed the football authorities off.

James ♠ wrote:

Radford11 wrote:Can't say i care which famous person is shagging who

Don't think they should be allowed to hide it though.

Why?

Dan wrote:

James ♠ wrote:

Radford11 wrote:Can't say i care which famous person is shagging who

Don't think they should be allowed to hide it though.

Why?

False impressions, especially when kids look up to these guys.

Put it this way, you are a parent and your son is a Man U fan. You want to get him a poster but you obviously want someone who would be a good influence on your kid, Ryan Giggs was one of them people ( we thought).

Sounds stupid but gotta think about these things...

this is a load of shite