Friday, June 10, 2011

Goodwin Judge peels open the tin of beans

As mentioned yesterday, the Goodwin injunction has gone from farce to super farce. The newspapers have gone to the Judges on multiple occasions and it is turning into a game of guess who?

Firstly we learned XXX was Fred Goodwin. We were later allowed to know he was a banker. We learned he had an affair. And the affair was with a fellow worker, VBN. Yesterday the Judges are looking at allowing her job title to be released.

What next? Clues as to where they had sex? Was it in the Boardroom? In his limo? In his office?

A complete waste of the Courts time.

It is in the public interest to know why a huge bank was bailed out by you and I at great expense and this ludicrous slow spilling of beans is making a mockery of us all.


  1. Free speech. How to say what you want on the internet, totally anonymously:
    The expensive London solicitors can't stop you.

  2. This misses the point entirely. The newspapers cannot name her, because of intrusion, private life etc, but they can report the fact of the affair and the role of the woman in RBS. Anyone else can do whatever they like, on the internet, aerial sky-writing, or whatever. This isn't some privacy thing trying to gag the world and the's a reasonable curb on press reporting. You can name her on here if you want.

  3. There is no such thing as a reasonable curb on press reporting. There is either freedom of the press or the sort of crackdown South Africa did under apartheid, the Soviet Union did under communism & is doing now under Putin, and what China does to enforce its behaviour code.

  4. Perhaps like in the game of "Clue": "With the Banker, on the Table, in the Boardroom".