Mister M Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 Well details of another Socialist fat cat, Blair are pretty public, so why should £600,000 pa (I thank yaw)Andy Marr details not be made public? No mention of Cecil Parkinson's injunction in 1993 with regards to the press reporting about his daughter Flora Keys? Of course not, he's a Tory fat cat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 You are nearly there. The rich don't live by different laws, full stop. No but there is evidence that the law treats them with more leniency when caught out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 No mention of Cecil Parkinson's injunction in 1993 with regards to the press reporting about his daughter Flora Keys? Miss Keys was almost ten years old by then. It was hardly a case of Cecil Parkinson trying to conceal the fact that she existed, or was the product of an affair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 Miss Keys was almost ten years old by then. It was hardly a case of Cecil Parkinson trying to conceal the fact that she existed, or was the product of an affair. So why did he seek an injunction then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 So why did he seek an injunction then? I do not know. I don't remember the details. If he'd sought such an injunction back in 1983 to try and prevent the affair ever becoming public knowledge, there would be a useful comparison to make. The most likely explanation for taking one out ten years after he was publicly humiliated, would be to protect his daughter from paparazzi and gossipmongers; it couldn't possibly have done any good for himself. It was ten years too late for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manofstrad Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 No but there is evidence that the law treats them with more leniency when caught out. Can you provide said evidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 If you don't understand it yet, I'm very sorry to say, but you'll never understand it? The subject matter and the profile of his job is all the clues you need. Re-think! I guess I'll never understand why a political journalist should be sacked for having an affair. If that is what you dee sackable you'd make a terrible manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
best sheff Posted April 26, 2011 Author Share Posted April 26, 2011 I guess I'll never understand why a political journalist should be sacked for having an affair. If that is what you dee sackable you'd make a terrible manager. Ok, we'll beg-to-differ. But thanks for input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 Ok, we'll beg-to-differ. But thanks for input. I don't really understand why anyone would be sacked for having an affair though, unless it adversely affected their work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 Not like journalists have much of a (generalised) reputation to live up to Exactly! Most of them spend their Sunday afternoons snorting coke off a hookers thigh so Marr's incursions are quite tame! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.