Categories:UK

Only the public interest can justify invasions of privacy

  • Print
  • Comments (4)

Readers' comments (4)

  • Max Mosley. privacy question

    It has been repeatedly stated that this story had no public interest as "nobody knew who Mosley is". We are told, here in N.America, that each Formula 1 race is viewed by an estimated 350 million people. Most of these people, will know the name and position of Mosley and feel strongly that they do not want a pervert as the head of "their" sport. In reading hundreds of comments on a huge number of articles on the matter, most have been condemning of the man.

    All this apart from one man, one lawyer, Mr. Eady, who is a purveyor of the law as HE SEES IT. We will see what a jury thinks of it all in the next round. Thank goodness it will be jury this time; at least a judgement of his "peers"

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Head of a public institution - public interest

    Mr Benaim is naive in his belief that the Mosley judgment will not hamper serious investigative journalism.

    In the past politicians cavorting with prostitutes led to resignations for the very real reason that they lay themselves open to blackmail and/or manipulation.

    Now if a politician or member of any strategic public institution (such as President of the FIA) is a member of the “BDSM community” for instance, as many blogging Mosley supporters have been referring to themselves throughout this case, they will attempt to use the Mosley judgment to conceal their activities; likewise this could apply to private individuals in occupations involving children.

    Newspapers will have to conclude that they are not exposing “a serious crime” and not publish for fear of litigation.

    No sitting duck; in an interview given last Tuesday reproduced on ITV.com, Mosely says Lord Stevens warned him before the event and Mosely believes it is likely that a leading figure in FI helped the News of the World set up the sting because Bernie Ecclestone gave him a name in January.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I am a member of that 'public' and I have 'interests'

    “Not considered to be in the public interest”?

    I would suggest that this is unquestionably a blinkered view shared by few others than Mr Justice Eady himself and persons of similar “celebrity” or notable status (to that previously enjoyed by Mr Mosley) choosing of their own volition to abuse or put at risk their positions due to their persuasions(?).

    At best, this surely demonstrates a damning example of complete ineptitude on the part of Mr Justice Eady towards having a capacity to identify who the ‘public’ are and having any familiarity whatsoever with their ‘interests.’

    Quote; “But Mr Justice Eady found no evidence of a Nazi theme and that the newspaper had invaded Mr Mosley’s privacy”

    Call me a cynic, but seemingly quite to the contrary; it has been dutifully recorded that when Mr. Mosley “punished” a half naked woman whom had earlier been subjected to a degrading & humiliating enactment of screening for head-lice, beatings & Germanic verbal abuse (a woman whom was coincidentally clad in striped prisoner uniform seemingly reminiscent of the nature of clothing issued to Jews incarcerated in Auschwitz), he called out the count in a guttural German.

    One dominatrix wore a Luftwaffe uniform; another, to whom Mr. Mosley spoke in German, wore a military "guard's" uniform; and a third protested, "But we are the Aryan race, the blondes.”

    Excuse my apparent ignorance, but I consider myself to be very much representative of a ‘member of the public’ and cannot make any claim to be personally employed or associated with the Legal Profession. Therefore, my more learned friends, I seek your elucidation. Kindly enlighten me in words of few syllables; in-fact, a simple ‘(a)’ or ‘(b)’ will suffice. What exactly does the “role play” scenario enacted for personal gratification accurately described in the paragraph above actually depict in your opinion?

    Is it, (a) a typical Wormwood Scrubs/Holloway-esque ‘normal’ prison environment which one would hope the likes of Mr Justice Eady would be entirely familiar or
    (b) A scene depicting torturous activities seemingly conveyed with Nazi-esque overtones?

    Even if your interpretation of events leans towards (b); you may further be of the considered opinion, “So what if Mr. Mosley, 68, son of England's fascist leader of the 1930s wishes to conduct himself in this manner; this is not of newsworthy relevance or of interest to anyone but Mr Mosley himself”(?).

    Similarly, it may be felt that as he was a relative unknown outside the world of motor sport, Mr Mosley represented unfair game to the media”(?); Really? Max Mosley is in-fact President of the FIA, which consists of 213 national member organisations throughout 125 countries worldwide representing many thousands of individual members.

    The FIA are undoubtedly powerful, represent huge wealth and have tentacles within the highest levels of commercialism and their operations operate consistently within the full media gaze.

    Max Mosley’s duties as President regularly find him representing not only this huge organisation but also to some extent the UK to the likes of Heads of State and Royalty.

    Moreover, as much as being synonymous with the glamour surrounding motor sport, the FIA supposedly represents many seemingly wholesome responsibilities too, such as the likes of nurturing young talent into sport, promotion of road safety and to represent the general interests of motoring organisations and motor

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I am a member of that 'public' and I have 'interests' (cont.d)

    As a member of the ‘public’, I am not immediately aware of the name of my County’s Police Commissioner; nor am I particularly familiar with the extra-curricular activities of my children’s School Headmaster; likewise the Head of the City Hospital, Leader of the Council, Head of Race Relations, the Head of the German Embassy in London or the likes; but I unashamedly admit that would very much have an active ‘interest’ in being made aware of any such individuals involving themselves in practices similar to those recorded for Max Mosley in order for myself to form a vested opinion .

    In this particular case, add to the mix any connotations which may be derived & implied by Max Mosley’s genealogy and surely any claim of this being a report-worthy item to the interest of others outside of Max Mosley himself would be wholly justified?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (4)