Sir Philip Green accused of clawing back £35million from the collapse

[Lockdoctor]

If you believe in secrecy, then you will be supporting Green, I believe we should have more openness.

Why do you think the wealthy should have the privilege of secrecy?

I am supporting the decision which three High Court Judges made not Sir Philip Green.

[El Cid]

I am supporting the decision which three High Court Judges made not Sir Philip Green.

 

You are, but you did not answer my question about secrecy. Are you a secretive person?

I would have lots more openness in our society.

[The Joker]

It wasn't a superinjunction. If it had been the Telegraph wouldn't even have been able to report that an injunction was in place.

 

Yes, you're quite right, it was not a super-injunction.

 

I let my intense dislike of sir Philip Green override my normally calm and rational demeanour.

 

It won't happen again.

[Lockdoctor]

You are, but you did not answer my question about secrecy. Are you a secretive person?

I would have lots more openness in our society.

I am missing your point because as another poster pointed out, those allegedly harassed and abused have accepted Sir Philip Green's money to keep the allegations secret. We all know that if it had not been for the BHS scandal, then Peter Hain would not have used parliamentary privilege to name Sir Philip Green has the person connected to the injunction.

[Top Cats Hat]

 

as another poster pointed out, those allegedly harassed and abused have accepted Sir Philip Green's money to keep the allegations secret.

 

And as I pointed out earlier, it is not up to his victims to decide whether this remains secret, regardless of what they were paid.

 

It seems now that at least five people, possibly more, have received sums of a million or more pounds to keep quiet about incidents of racism and sexual harassment by Philip Green. In the current climate where society is finally rejecting the premise that it is OK for those with power, money or influence to abuse others with impunity it is absolutely in the public interest that those trying to hush that kind of behaviour up should be exposed.

 

It is irrelevant what Hain's motives may or may not have been as the information is out there now. There was also a queue of others behind him who would have done exactly the same thing.

[El Cid]

I am missing your point because as another poster pointed out, those allegedly harassed and abused have accepted Sir Philip Green's money to keep the allegations secret. We all know that if it had not been for the BHS scandal, then Peter Hain would not have used parliamentary privilege to name Sir Philip Green has the person connected to the injunction.

 

They can continue to do that, but someone spilt the beans.

 

Are you a person that believes in secrecy? These days many put photos and everyday things on facebook, I think that the right for freedom of information request was a great step in the right direction. Yet some people prefer secrecy.

[Lockdoctor]

And as I pointed out earlier, it is not up to his victims to decide whether this remains secret, regardless of what they were paid.

 

It seems now that at least five people, possibly more, have received sums of a million or more pounds to keep quiet about incidents of racism and sexual harassment by Philip Green. In the current climate where society is finally rejecting the premise that it is OK for those with power, money or influence to abuse others with impunity it is absolutely in the public interest that those trying to hush that kind of behaviour up should be exposed.

 

It is irrelevant what Hain's motives may or may not have been as the information is out there now. There was also a queue of others behind him who would have done exactly the same thing.

All we know is that allegations have been made against Sir Philip Green. We don't know whether the allegations are true or false. We do know that false allegations can be damaging to a rich powerful person, which is why people are paid money to keep quiet. The only person we know is in the wrong here is Peter Hain because he undermined the ruling made by three high court judges.

[The Joker]

. . .We do know that false allegations can be damaging to a rich powerful person. . .

 

and they can be even more damaging to poor, powerless people, who don't have the resources to fund super-injunctions every time the press publish damaging allegations about them.

 

Here's an idea: tell these rich powerful people to stop sticking their willies into other women and they won't need a super-injunction every again!

 

Everybody wins!*

 

*Except the lawyers.

[Top Cats Hat]

We don't know whether the allegations are true or false.

 

Really?

 

I think the fact that he paid a serious amount of money to keep these allegations secret and to more than one person too, suggests that the allegations are absolutely true.

 

Green doesn't act in isolation. He has access to the most expensive legal advice going and if that advice is to pay a million pounds for a non disclosure agreement then that legal advice is almost certainly telling him that the victim has enough evidence to put him in court.

[ANGELFIRE1]

It's doubtful that an individual who allegedly owns 3 boats, one worth over 300 million would miss a couple of million to keep folk quiet.

 

Angel1.