Super-injunctions: right or wrong?

Super-injunctions: right or wrong?

Big Brother star Imogen Thomas is the latest celebrity to be involved with the controversial super-injunction by the courts. It was revealed that Imogen had an affair with a married Premiership footballer with children for six months. She appeared on This Morning and spoke to Philip Schofield and Ruth Langford of how she felt she had been “thrown to the lions” because she “didn’t have £50,000 to get an injunction”. She said: “I had no intention of speaking about the man-I just wish my name was protected, it has been such a horrible experience for me.”

There is a increasing trend for rich celebrities, especially footballers to simply throw down the cash so they can then keep their dirty laundry in the laundry bin. Last year, John Terry was granted a super-injunction amidst claims he's had an affair with teammate Wayne Bridge's ex-girlfriend, it was lifted a week later and covered in depth by the British press. Many journalists have argued this goes against our freedom of the press, that celebrities should expect to have their lives printed on the front page of the Daily Mail and The Sun because their occupation means they are public property, so to speak. Even Andrew Marr, a highly experienced and well respected journalist admitted to undertaking a super-injunction. 

On the one hand, super-injunctions help to protect the victims of a scandal. The wives and children of celebrities who have strayed. But is it for the best they live in blissful ignorance while their cheating husband gets away with it? 

What about women like Imogen? Many women would say she made her bed and now she must lie in it (excuse the pun) but surely she doesn’t deserve to be abused via Twitter and Facebook because, let’s face it, we all make mistakes when we fall for someone and get swept off our feet by a rich man (happens to us all the time). Of course, if Imogen had no plans to discuss her private life why did she go on daytime television to discuss it with millions of viewers? Imogen will certainly bounce back, she will earn enough from magazine interviews and photo-shoots to compensate for the distress caused and the exposure will mean opportunities for similar work in the future. I’m A Celebrity perhaps, or bikini shots in FHM magazine. 

What do you think about the super-injunction debate? Should it be used to protect families of people involved in a scandal? Should there be more protection in place for ‘the other woman?’ Does it make a mockery of freedom of the press? Perhaps you’re just nosy and want to know what really goes on in celeb land...Wonder Woman wants to know your thoughts. Please leave your comments below. WW


Watch Imogen's interview on This Morning: