Max Mosley Case

**Devastatin Dave** · 07-09-2008, 07:20

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Even if he did, in fact, roleplay in that manner, it's his private life and he did nothing illegal. The press should

off, plain and simple.

The press has every right to print the story. I agree with Tribsey, if the dude digs humiliation, isn't it a bit silly to be sueing because of being humiliated? I mean come on, she should read the story while someone poops on him while having a rubber ball shoved in his mouth.. AND LIKE IT!!! Yes, you like it when Daddy humiliates you in the press, yes you do, yes you do!!!

**Tribesman** · 07-09-2008, 09:57

That got me thinking whether there might be any business interests behind this article and the pics.

Business interests ?

Formula One interests to be precise.

No never , well by never I mean only if they were to become a little annoyed if Max was to do something like bringing his whipping crew on tour with him and claiming it as expenses

But hey he wouldn't fly his whores out to Monaco would he ?
Surely he would just use the local ones .

Oh dear has Max been on the fiddle , naughty Max needs spanking..."but we are the aryan race"....or perhaps a good kicking woud be in order

**Adrian II** · 07-09-2008, 10:32

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Business interests ?

Yes, business interests. As in: Formula One racing is a world-wide billion dollar motorcar, marketing, merchandising, sponsoring, advertisement and tv business, the funding of which is a mystery to every government and even to most participants.

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

I mean come on, she should read the story while someone poops on him while having a rubber ball shoved in his mouth.. AND LIKE IT!!!

And thank you Professor Devastatin for a fascinating exposé on press freedom in the light of article 8 ECHR.

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Even if he did, in fact, roleplay in that manner, it's his private life and he did nothing illegal. The press should off, plain and simple.

I agree.

Some members seem unable to look beyond the merits of the person and grasp the legal and political merits of the case, no? If you think it's okay for the press to ruin Mosley's life for a laugh, don't be surprised if they ruin yours for someone else's laugh.

In fact I'm already on your case, Tribesy. Boy, those pics of you in lace-up boots and women's underwear look fine.

**HoreTore** · 07-09-2008, 11:32

Breach of privacy, I say. This information has absolutely no real value to us.

Scandal journalists should be given a neckshot, IMO. They're the greatest threat to democracy these days. The true opium for the masses.

**KukriKhan** · 07-09-2008, 12:54

At stake, if I read correctly, is his job, yes? Didn't he ask for and get a 'vote of confidence', after the alleged orgy?

: shrug : He's not an elected official, and no tax dollars are involved that I can see; so the story is about some rich guy's bedroom antics. Not news. Rather: scandal. Over here that kind of story would be covered by The National Enquirer, the supermarket-sold gossip and scandal sheet, with a reputation for about 5% accuracy.

**Fragony** · 07-09-2008, 15:17

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Breach of privacy, I say. This information has absolutely no real value to us.

Hear hear. Guy has a fetish. So bloody what couldn't care less, whorenalists like this should get an anal probe with GPS tracking see how they like being watched.

**Evil_Maniac From Mars** · 07-09-2008, 15:23

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

The press has every right to print the story.

The press does not have every right to humiliate someone (America has these laws too, I'm sure), and that's all that article was.

**ICantSpellDawg** · 07-09-2008, 15:53

That article reduced my opinion of fascists. I want the ideological fascism (minus the massive killing of the jews), not that SA orgie crap. Or the SS ritual of consumating marriage in ancient cemetaries. Go back to San Fran or Manhattan.

Thought crimes, crimes against the state for showing nazi paraphernalia, crimes against my right to engage in sado-masochistic nazi sex parties and not have anyone find out. Europe has a disease and should be quarantined before it spreads.

**Adrian II** · 07-09-2008, 17:50

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Europe has a disease and should be quarantined before it spreads.

You mean to say Europe has privacy legislation and its extent is debatable. Sure, I don't feel entirely comfortable with any sort of legistation that curbs the freedom of the press, but if it protects my freedom from the press there may be something to it.

My best guess is that art. 8 will eventually cover the private life of people who are in the public eye for whatever reason, unless said private life is demonstrably at odds with their public function. I think it will not be restricted to people in public office only, but extended to all people with some sort of public role, including for instance movie stars. Tough luck for my esteemed colleagues the paparazzi.

**ICantSpellDawg** · 07-09-2008, 18:15

Originally Posted by Adrian II

You mean to say Europe has privacy legislation and its extent is debatable. Sure, I don't feel entirely comfortable with any sort of legistation that curbs the freedom of the press, but if it protects my freedom from the press there may be something to it.

My best guess is that art. 8 will eventually cover the private life of people who are in the public eye for whatever reason, unless said private life is demonstrably at odds with their public function. I think it will not be restricted to people in public office only, but extended to all people with some sort of public role, including for instance movie stars. Tough luck for my esteemed colleagues the paparazzi.

This is a similar argument to illegitimate search and seizure clauses in the U.S. When a police officer pulls over a car for having a tail light out, opens the trunk without cause and finds kilos of Coke and heroin - the bad guys go free. While they are technically off the hook from a legal perspective, their credibility is shot to crap and people should be angered and disgusted. This guy, even though he is legally right, is a despicable fiend who should be given a scarlet letter.

Some people get confused into thinking that, because the press is liable they start to defend the actions of the degenerate. Sounds absurd, but it happens so often it is comical.

**Adrian II** · 07-09-2008, 18:48

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Some people get confused into thinking that, because the press is liable they start to defend the actions of the degenerate.

Maybe some people do.

All I do is defend everyone's right to privacy.

**ICantSpellDawg** · 07-09-2008, 19:59

Originally Posted by Adrian II

Maybe some people do.

All I do is defend everyone's right to privacy.

I've always believed that you are a fair and bright guy. It is, however tempting to champion the acts after a long enough period of protecting the actor.

I agree that the idea that the press can publish your personal details is abhorent, but so are the mans actions.