Anorak | Ryan Giggs Faces ‘Jail’: Manchester United’s Model Of Discretion Refuses To Kiss ‘N’ Tell

Ryan Giggs Faces ‘Jail’: Manchester United’s Model Of Discretion Refuses To Kiss ‘N’ Tell

by | 11th, June 2011

RYAN Giggs is going to jail? So says the Daily Star on its front page.

It makes a change from news that Ryan Giggs is going to Wembley. Or Ryan Giggs is going to a hotel room in Manchester with your wife.

News is:

RYAN Giggs faces jail over the gagging order he got to cover up an affair with glamour girl Imogen Thomas.

That gagging order is the super-injunction blown away on Twitter and by an MP. Indeed, anyone who outed Giggs on Twitter still faces the possibility of legal censure. Might it be that the Twitter users who Tawatted Giggs end up in the same jail as their nemesis?

We read on:

Ryan Giggs could be prosecuted for perjury if judges think he misled them about his happily-married family man status to obtain his injunction.

Hold on. Didn’t Giggs admit to having seen Imogen Thomas three times in his appeal for an injunction against her broadcasting her story? And wasn’t she accused of trying to blackmail him for cash?

Didn’t the judge rule :

The evidence before the court at that point, therefore, appeared strongly to suggest that the Claimant was being blackmailed (although that is not how he put it himself). I hasten to add, as is obvious, that I cannot come to any final conclusion about it at this stage. I have to make an assessment of the situation on the limited (and untested) evidence as it now stands. (That is what is required by s.12(3) of the Human Rights Act, to which I shall return shortly.)

The Human Rights act is open to interpretation .

Imogen Thomas denies being a blackmailer.

So much for the facts. Back to the Daily Star , wherein Jerry Lawton tells us:

The crime carries a maximum sentence of seven years in jail.

The assumption is that because Giggs might have been shagging his sister-in-law, Natasha Giggs, the image of his being a family man was only an image? This assumes much: that he was cheating; his wife cares if he cheats; you can’t be a good family man if you shag others than your wife; and the law has a clear definition fo what ‘family man’ means.

The Star adds:

Lawyers say if Giggs is found to have deliberately withheld details of other affairs from the court he is open to prosecution.

Anorak is bamboozled by the law and vacillations. Wasn’t Giggs’ injunction against anyone talking about his alleged afffair with Imogen Thomas ? It was. Why would any alleged shags with a member of his family affect that ruling?

Reading on:

D-Day for the £80,000-a-week star is November 7 when he will give evidence at a hearing to determine if the injunction should remain in place.

You might suppsoe D-Day has long gone. Natasha Giggs is not the subject of a legal restraint. She is free to speak. The Star adds:

He is sure to be grilled by Mr Justice Eady over the alleged flings. And he will face a blast from Sir Alex Ferguson, 69, for disrupting United’s season, which will be well under way.

And so it is that from a headline-making story about Giggs being jailed, the shocker runs rapidly out of steam to such a degree that we are told that a 37-year-old squad member’s sex life (born 29 November 1973) will damage Manchester United’s season. In much the same way news of Wayne

You have already read 1 premium article for free today
Access immediately the premium content with Multipass

Or come back tomorrow

Posted: 11th, June 2011 | In: Sports Comment | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink