Wednesday, May 25, 2011

So who did out Ryan Giggs first?

The Evening Standard has named some Twitter celebrities who are going to be sued. This is a bit silly.

There were thousands who Tweeted Ryan Giggs name before he had been outed by an MP, and the Evening Standard Tweeters have been picked on because they are:

a) famous
b) famous
c) famous;

They are:

Piers Morgan
Dom Joly
Boy George
Toby Young

But did they really know CTB was Ryan Giggs? I extremely doubt it. They were like sheep and were just copying the little people who had learned of CTB's real identity. We, like many others, learned about it potentially being him from Twitter, forums, blogs and the mainstream media who were laying out nice clues.

The real question is who leaked first? One of Imogen Thomas's friends perhaps? Someone at Schillings? Maybe Giggs after a yoga session? Or one of the newspapers? Sounds to us like a full government enquiry is required. This is serious stuff.

When we started this blog in April, someone commented and said

"Google imogen thomas injunction"

...which we did and there was his name. So Google has a good idea who posted something online way before @InjunctionSuper did on 8 May 2011.

The injunction, we believe, was taken out on 15 April 2011

The Daily Mirror reported on 21 April 2011, after the CTB injunction had been tightened up on that day, the footballer was a family man and a household name. They also described Imogen Thomas as a busty "Welsh" girl.

The Daily Mail said surprisingly very little, but the Daily Telegraph did tell its readers it was easy to find his name:

"It takes two clicks on Google to find out who NEJ is, and you don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to discover the identity of the footballer who had an affair with Big Brother contestant Imogen Thomas. The judge gave him the initials CTB, which we must presume stands for 'cheating, two-timing bastard'"

Wikipedia edits also showed his name around this time. So it must have been "out there" for quite a while.

16 April 2011, a blog stated it was Giggs" "Iv no idea but try thinking of flying welsh winger whose name rhymes with ryan giggs......."

18 April 2011 "Educated guess! Just enter ryan giggs into search on twitter. The whole of twitterland seems to think its him. Can't blame him anyway I think she's bang tidy!" was reported on

23 April 2011, Have I Got News For You had a Tory MP mouthing his name (it was bleeped out) and some of the audience may have heard Giggs's name being said.

27 April 2011, this blog explicitly stated Giggs had taken out an injunction.

By 30 April 2011, many forums were reporting his name (along with many other potential footballers) including where Ryan Giggs was outed by many commentators.

1 May 2011, Rod Liddle published Ryan Giggs name in the Sunday Times.

And here is a chart of Tweets relating to Giggs:

But the real issue is few of these people were party to the injunction or knew of its existence so how can they be held in contempt of court?

Thanks for pointing this out whatsthedirt commentator; this looks like the first outing on Twitter and the Tweeter Schillings are after ...


  1. Are we to expect that there was no post-coital locker-room gossip and that this information could only have originated with those named in the injunction? Hah!

  2. This Twitter account - @theurbaninsider - posted that it was Giggs on the 18th of April. That was definitely the first I saw of it on Twitter anyway.

  3. Ignorance is no defence.... as these "famous people" will soon find out. And there is no point in suing someone with no money....

  4. Ignorance is no defence. The Spycatcher rule means that they do not have to be party to the injunction to be bound by it. I trust that 75,000 summonses for contempt of court shall be forthcoming. Either that, or the courts should refuse to try whoever's been vandalising the reporters' kit outside Giggs' house - after all, turnabout is fair play.

  5. We know who vandalised the reporters' cars: the fans hit the shits.

  6. This tweet from 14 April is the earliest I could find ...!/unknownj/status/58636237782781952

  7. but how can Schillings sue for a breach of a court order when the order is still in place? Surely if the order was broken they should relinquish the injunction and then sue?

  8. "but how can Schillings sue for a breach of a court order when the order is still in place?"

    Quite easily.