Four

As I have said already three times that I was off this weekend, I still have to post one more comment to make the balance even... .

FOUR
Injunctions

Two or three Sundays ago, I had breakfast outside a coffee shop and read a couple of magazines in the meantime. The morning was brilliant and sunny. There it was this documentary piece on injunctions. Don't remember exactly, I think it was this lady who wanted to write a book about her life and tell the story of her affair with a politician.Of course, the man was protected by whatever injunction and it was about it. Is it fair? Is it not? And all the questions you can imagine to unroot the real drivers of the case.

The papers have today the case of Jemima Khan and Jeremy Clarkson. Ok, I confess that I had no idea who these people were -until now-. The story is interesting in the sense that some user of twitter (operated from the US, outside UK, according to The Telegraph) has led to stake Miss Khan and her kids, in fact her whole life. It is not the first time. No rules, no laws, like a divine punishment, no race difference nor occupations. But why? What is the purpose? No purpose, just for fun?

It sounds weird that, if accusations were really untrue, someone who finds her picture in the paper in the morning, goes to twitter herself and writes something as much affected as "I've woken up trapped in a bloody nightmare". But, anyhow, now, what? In theory you can track the accuser, but on what grounds? Would be on those of injunction, but that will mean it was true and humiliation will be added on top. Perhaps, on those of libel and slander?

Again, a black abyss in only 150 words. Twitter, an evil curse.

(PLEASE, LEAVE YOUR COMMENT)