About the Hogan sex tape scandal

The story of Hogan’s notorious sex tape drew some attention in October 2012, when he sued celebrity news site Gawker for posting a portion of a tape of him having sex with Heather Clem, ex-wife of radio personality Bubba the Love Sponge. He also filed a lawsuit against Clem and Sponge at that point in time.

The sex tape was made six years ago while Clem was married to Sponge, and the encounter occurred at her home. Hogan still claims that he had no idea that the encounter was being taped. In a Huffington Post interview, Hogan said that he “never knew” there was a camera. He reportedly had no idea that someone would “put up a camera” to record his sex act.

Where the case stands today

The key legal aspect of this story is that Hogan sued Gawker in federal court while he sued Clem and Sponge in Florida state court. However, he dropped the federal suit and re-filed it as a $100 million lawsuit in the state of Florida. Furthermore, Hogan dropped the lawsuit against Bubba the Love Sponge, though he is still holding Heather Clem accountable for making the tape and leaking it without his knowledge or consent. The cases against Gawker and Heather Clem are now consolidated and going through the Florida court system.

Hogan admitted in a recent public statement that it was a “bad choice” made at a “low point” in his life. While he definitely has a legal leg to stand on with regard to privacy laws, only time will tell whether a jury is sympathetic to the former Wrestlemania champion.

via Hulk Hogan Sues Gawker for $100 Million | Celeb Legal Issues.

I asked a State-side friend on Twitter how the show was received in the states and the response is “not very well”. She said that its appeal in the UK might be down to it involving American’s acting like morons. In its most basic sense it is. Because Americans act stupidly in such situations we find it comical and entertaining. In this country they would take the news better, with tact, dignity and discretion and be more calculating than to run into a restaurant screaming “Pay my bills! Make it rain!”.

The main reason why Cheaters wouldn’t happen in the UK are two-fold. It is for societal reasons and, more importantly, for legal reasons.

Societal Reasons

So we had the chat show in the form of Trisha and later Jeremy Kyle. They were evidently rip-off’s of their American counterparts. When these sorts of shows came on, the conjecture was very much that things in this country don’t fly where they would in America.

One example of this would be a Polygraph or “lie-detector” test. In America their results are admissible as evidence in court. They are seen as infallible. In this country we know they are not. The police don’t use them, the courts don’t use them and our justice system is globally respected. When they wheel one out on a show like Jeremy Kyle, you know the results are going to ruin the relationship either way so why watch.

In the show Cheaters, they also hire private detectives. In this country one would not usually go to the lengths of hiring a detective. You either trust your partner or you don’t. If you trust your partner, stay with them, if you don’t break it off, thus hiring a private investigator to spy on your nearest and dearest would be frowned upon. Cheaters would seem like a fairly extreme length to go to.

Leveson and Privacy

Ever since one of Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers hired a private investigator to hack the telephone of a murdered schoolgirl, the media’s attitude to privacy has been scrutinised.

If we think that as a society we are presently redefining the media landscape and chastising Murdoch for spying on individuals. If we were then to give Carte Blanche to an entertainment program to be more intrusive that would simply not wash.

CTB and Article 8

Who remembers Ryan Giggs super injunction? That was granted because a media organisation presented an affront to his “private and family life“. Subsequently the papers could not name him. Human Rights Laws pretty much over-ride everything. Not only does spying on someone breach their human rights, but also in the resulting legal case would cost millions in damages. That’s if the episode got shown in the first instance.

The subject of the show obviously knows that they’re going to be on it during the confrontation. There is nothing to stop them from going to a judge, getting a super injunction (because despite what the media tell you, it’s not just for the rich and famous) and stopping the show from ever being shown.

In Summary

Sure the American’s have a show where people get stupid, and bad people get their comeuppance, but what they lack is important safeguards in society. Sure it’s nice to watch things like that, but as much as I like watching Cheaters, I value the safeguards in our legal system that would stop a show like that in the UK from ever being made far more.

Hark! I hear the cries of  “Hypocrite, Hypocrite!” shouted in my general direction. Yes I tweeted about Ryan Giggs and his Super Injunction and I had no problem in saying that he had a Super Injunction. That may be seen as an inappropriate breach of his privacy.

So why am I defending his privacy now, when then I took offence to him defending his privacy then?

The situation as I see it

Now when it comes to Ms. Imogen Thomas, there is no doubt in my mind as to her motivation. In my opinion, it is strictly financial. She said she wanted the right to defend herself. Well, her friends and family probably all know about it. Ryan Giggs friends and family all know about it. No-one else knew about it, so who did she want to defend herself to? The News of the World probably.

The same day after the secret around the injunction was blown, Imogen Thomas became the face of Paddy Power’s advertising campaign for the Champions League.

Be under no illusions, that girl is desperate for profile. She’s a former Miss Wales and Big Brother contestant. In my opinion that says it all.

The infidelity is a private matter and the last thing that a premiership footballer needs in the run up to a Champions League final is his name smattered all over the papers.

So why did I take offence and why did I join the legions of people naming him?

The explanation for that is a simple one.

The Illegality of injunctions

Ryan Giggs (supposedly) had an affair. I don’t know about it, I wasn’t there. It doesn’t concern me and quite frankly, I don’t care. When Ryan Giggs took out that Super Injunction, he defended his right to privacy. Article 8 of the Human Rights act guarantees his right to a private life. Everybody has the right to a private life as set out in the act. However, their private life, and right to it, cannot be guaranteed if his private life infringes on the rights of others.

In my opinion that is where the paradox occurs. Article 10 of the same act grants me freedom of expression. In other words, I can say what I want, where I want. In laymans terms article 10 guarantees me freedom of speech. When Ryan Giggs took out that injunction, he denied me my freedom to speak about him. He used the law to impinge on yours rights, mine, and the rights of the other 55 million people in England and Wales that the Injunction applies to.

I don’t think I have a “right” to know, nor do I consider Ryan Giggs to be “public property” and heaven knows it makes me physically sick to think that someone will profit from marital infidelity, but a celebrities right to a private life doesn’t give the courts “Carte Blanche” (i.e. limitless powers) to remove my rights.

Interestingly Article 10 says that with the right to free expression, comes the responsibility to use it correctly.

Going to town on Giggs

Now he hasn’t got an injunction, and it seems the press are going hell for leather. That isn’t right. Now he’s not impinging on my rights, I have no desire to exercise them.

I will say this though. For a start don’t believe everything you read in the papers. Tabloids know they can print what they want because a married father of two does not have enough time or finance to sue. They put an ad up asking if anyone has seen Ryan Giggs and to call the paper if they had. If they put that ad up it makes me think they haven’t seen him, and if they haven’t seen him, they haven’t spoken to him, and if they haven’t spoken to the lynch pin they have no way of reporting all of this as fact.

Another thing to remember is to be disinterested in this sort of thing. The papers pry into people’s private lives. They do so because it’s interesting, and because it sells papers. If it wasn’t selling papers, they wouldn’t print it. If you aren’t interested in it, it doesn’t sell and if it doesn’t sell then they don’t bother with it. If you don’t buy into it, they won’t print it.

Thirdly and finally, Super Injunctions are wrong. They are wrong because they impinge on my rights and yours. When it comes to private matters though, people deserve to deal with them privately, without the intrusions of the press. My hope is that instead of getting a Super Injunction, if they were to simply point out the last two paragraphs and promote condusive behaviour, hopefully we may one day live in a world where we don’t need Super Injunctions.

Our specialty is bringing you the most up-to-date entertainment news and the dishiest celebrity gossip, then showing you where the law stands on whatever the matter is that we are covering. We will tell you about the legal effects of various scenarios dealing with the celebrity of your choice, including legal areas such as the criminal laws, family laws, and personal injury.

Our founder, Russell Wetanson, is not only a seasoned entertainment reporter, he is also a high-profile legal expert who has represented such A-list talent as Madonna, and a lot of other celebrities you know and love.  His depth of inside knowledge and his service as attorney provides entertaining and informative reading, which i daresay is 1000X more interesting and informative than the usual tabloid drivel, at least in MY humble opinion.

Russell Wetanson has quite an extensive resume including radio, television and print media, not to mention is a regular contributor to “Showbiz Tonight” and “Hollywood Tonight” on HLN, as well as appearing on “Hollywood Confidential”, a show hosted by Leeza Gibbons on TV Guide Network.

We usually post several blog entries every day.  Stop on by, and while there, you can sign up to have updates emailed directly to you so that you never miss any of the juicy stuff!

Visit us online at: <a href=”http://popsquire.com”>www.popsquire.com</a&#62;