Like people who arent famous and you would have absolutely no idea who they were. You don't seriously think the only friend she has is Heaton? Obviously the papers will only ever talk about the celebrities.
We'll see who's telling the truth and who looks silly when the monkey and Hippo are finally caught. They'll be fighting to be the first to dish the dirt and blame the other
Freedom of Information request, to establish whether there was a chicken that spawned a whole thread, in other words lots of playground jokes, no consideration for anyone working in the coffee shops, who in this climate might have needed a job etc:)
You dont get a one star rating just for a de-frosting chicken:rolleyes: the place was dirty, and if the owner/staff thought differently then they shouldnt have been working there in the first place!!! ever had food poisoning, or seeing as this place encourages kids, ever seen a kid with food poisoning !! now that, I can assure you is no joke :mad:
There is a claim with this trial, for a permanent injunction (it's on the net). So, who was it again who doesn't want things coming out?
If its KP, then its a pity shes had to do this to stop two people she trusted from selling/telling the name of her rapist, dont blame her really, with no proof, the only out come now would be that innocent people, like his family would suffer, just like Im sure Andrew Goulds kids must do when they see their dads name dragged about in the press
Just a question... Would any of us like our PRIVATE health history sold to a paper? Anyone who thinks that selling a persons health history is doing a good think needs a head wobble
Just a question... Would any of us like our PRIVATE health history sold to a paper? Anyone who thinks that selling a persons health history is doing a good think needs a head wobble
Obviously the answer to that is no. But then again, the majority of us dont sell every aspect of our lives to the papers and magazines. We also dont put, or allow disgusting pictures of ourselves to be put out there for Anybody to see, or inform everybody when we are on a period (in the case of a female) .The list is endless. Sorry, Betty, but l have no sympathy at all for her in this respect.
just being out and out nosey ..... does anyone know who the father of this Jamelah birds baby is?
Lee May is the Father of Jamelah's daughter. KP put a photo up of her and Lee on her Twitter page last year when she was taunting Jamelah with the 'black hairy nostrils' jibe
If its KP, then its a pity shes had to do this to stop two people she trusted from selling/telling the name of her rapist, dont blame her really, with no proof, the only out come now would be that innocent people, like his family would suffer, just like Im sure Andrew Goulds kids must do when they see their dads name dragged about in the press
What about all the innocent men and their families who've been tarnished by press speculation that they might be 'Jordan's rapist' because she put the story into the public domain? She then disclosed the name to members of her production crew. The attempt to sell the name is shocking but the idea she's taking action to protect the identity of her rapist is laughable.
We'll see who's telling the truth and who looks silly when the monkey and Hippo are finally caught. They'll be fighting to be the first to dish the dirt and blame the other
I don't think you credit people with enough common sense Cyril. We might not know everything that went on behind the scenes but there's enough material out there that trying to rewrite history to make Kate the innocent, misunderstood 'truth teller' and Pete the deceitful devil just won't wash. I'm sure neither were blameless and both have been economical with the truth when it suits them. If my sympathies lie more with Pete it's only because of the impression that he wanted to stay quiet about the reasons for the split but finally felt he had to react to the barrage of stories coming from Kate. http://www.entertainmentwise.com/news/55993/Peter-Andre-To-Reveal-All-About-His-Divorce-To-Katie-Price
We might not know everything that went on behind the scenes but there's enough material out there that trying to rewrite history to make Kate the innocent, misunderstood 'truth teller' and Pete the deceitful devil just won't wash. I'm sure neither were blameless and both have been economical with the truth when it suits them.[/url]
I honestly dont think the real reason is in the public domain, there's obviously a lot more to it. If it was as simple as her having some affair i couldn't see CP holding back.
Not trying to say either are innocent or misguided but its obviously going to completely screw up his image.
Obviously the answer to that is no. But then again, the majority of us dont sell every aspect of our lives to the papers and magazines. We also dont put, or allow disgusting pictures of ourselves to be put out there for Anybody to see, or inform everybody when we are on a period (in the case of a female) .The list is endless. Sorry, Betty, but l have no sympathy at all for her in this respect.
No one should be threatened with their personal medical history being splashed about just so the other person looks like a good guy... Anyone threatening that is a low life as far as I'm concerned...If it was the other way round people would be screaming for her blood and rightly so ..because she would be in the wrong
I honestly dont think the real reason is in the public domain, there's obviously a lot more to it. If it was as simple as her having some affair i couldn't see CP holding back.
Not trying to say either are innocent or misguided but its obviously going to completely screw up his image.
She obviously didn't have an affair or we would all know about it by now.. A "source" would of told Dan Wootten and he would of tweeted it by now . If the stories are right Peter THOUGHT Katie was THINKING of having an affair with Andrew Gould so he left.
Just a question... Would any of us like our PRIVATE health history sold to a paper? Anyone who thinks that selling a persons health history is doing a good think needs a head wobble
The case does not seem to be about this Betty. Read the two links bellow.
She obviously didn't have an affair or we would all know about it by now.. A "source" would of told Dan Wootten and he would of tweeted it by now . If the stories are right Peter THOUGHT Katie was THINKING of having an affair with Andrew Gould so he left.
I'm not so sure there is a 'reason', or a specific reason we don't know about. mainly because the idea of something being secret with these two is laughable, but also because he has built this up and built this up with no reveal, and whenever he is desperate for press he always brings it out, I think anything he says now would be a let down.
I'm not so sure there is a 'reason', or a specific reason we don't know about. mainly because the idea of something being secret with these two is laughable, but also because he has built this up and built this up with no reveal, and whenever he is desperate for press he always brings it out, I think anything he says now would be a let down.
I also think the "reason" will be a let down when it's eventually revealed ..
What about all the innocent men and their families who've been tarnished by press speculation that they might be 'Jordan's rapist' because she put the story into the public domain? She then disclosed the name to members of her production crew. The attempt to sell the name is shocking but the idea she's taking action to protect the identity of her rapist is laughable.
She has control over who the press speculate about as for the AG rumours .......as its turning out, its looking as if she was right, and two old friends were infact trying to flog stuff about her to the media
I also think the "reason" will be a let down when it's eventually revealed ..
I don't even think he has a 'reason', and will make some nonsense up. It strikes me as a bit like a bad soap storyline, where a cliffhanger is dragged on and on and the eventual reveal is a massive let down because you know the writers had to make it up at the last minute in order to have a conclusion.
I honestly dont think the real reason is in the public domain, there's obviously a lot more to it. If it was as simple as her having some affair i couldn't see CP holding back.
Not trying to say either are innocent or misguided but its obviously going to completely screw up his image.
I agree and for reasons that have only, as yet, been touched on and dismissed, nothing bad, but something that he should have dealt with a long time ago, for his own sake
Could someone please tell me why he has named this charity after himself rather than his brother? I can imagine the buses to have his mug on the sides and rear too, what about Andrew? He is mentioned enough, we all know who he is, surely this should have been The Andrew Andre Foundation :rolleyes:
What about all the innocent men and their families who've been tarnished by press speculation that they might be 'Jordan's rapist' because she put the story into the public domain? She then disclosed the name to members of her production crew. The attempt to sell the name is shocking but the idea she's taking action to protect the identity of her rapist is laughable.
She has control over who the press speculate about as for the AG rumours .......as its turning out, its looking as if she was right, and two old friends were infact trying to flog stuff about her to the media
Could someone please tell me why he has named this charity after himself rather than his brother? I can imagine the buses to have his mug on the sides and rear too, what about Andrew? He is mentioned enough, we all know who he is, surely this should have been The Andrew Andre Foundation :rolleyes:
Have to be honest .. I was suprised he named it after himself ( or maybe not)
Have to be honest .. I was suprised he named it after himself ( or maybe not)
Perhaps he thinks of himself as a Douglas Macmillan type of person, thing is Andre, Douglas did not name his charity Macmillan that came way after his death and if you're thinking of Marie Curie... you know what, just do one Andre :rolleyes:
Could someone please tell me why he has named this charity after himself rather than his brother? I can imagine the buses to have his mug on the sides and rear too, what about Andrew? He is mentioned enough, we all know who he is, surely this should have been The Andrew Andre Foundation :rolleyes:
Maybe he thinks people will recognise his name and not his brothers?? (I'm trying to think of reasons that are not egotistical, I'm struggling)
Comments
They had 8 bridesmaids I believe .. Of those Kerry Katona ,Michelle Clack and an Andre relative are the ones who didn't attend this time I think
Wasn't Sarah from Girls Aloud one as well?
Yes she was .. But what people forget is they weren't all her friends..
Like people who arent famous and you would have absolutely no idea who they were. You don't seriously think the only friend she has is Heaton? Obviously the papers will only ever talk about the celebrities.
We'll see who's telling the truth and who looks silly when the monkey and Hippo are finally caught. They'll be fighting to be the first to dish the dirt and blame the other
You dont get a one star rating just for a de-frosting chicken:rolleyes: the place was dirty, and if the owner/staff thought differently then they shouldnt have been working there in the first place!!! ever had food poisoning, or seeing as this place encourages kids, ever seen a kid with food poisoning !! now that, I can assure you is no joke :mad:
If its KP, then its a pity shes had to do this to stop two people she trusted from selling/telling the name of her rapist, dont blame her really, with no proof, the only out come now would be that innocent people, like his family would suffer, just like Im sure Andrew Goulds kids must do when they see their dads name dragged about in the press
Obviously the answer to that is no. But then again, the majority of us dont sell every aspect of our lives to the papers and magazines. We also dont put, or allow disgusting pictures of ourselves to be put out there for Anybody to see, or inform everybody when we are on a period (in the case of a female) .The list is endless. Sorry, Betty, but l have no sympathy at all for her in this respect.
Lee May is the Father of Jamelah's daughter. KP put a photo up of her and Lee on her Twitter page last year when she was taunting Jamelah with the 'black hairy nostrils' jibe
http://twitter.yfrog.com/nxi0ltrj
What about all the innocent men and their families who've been tarnished by press speculation that they might be 'Jordan's rapist' because she put the story into the public domain? She then disclosed the name to members of her production crew. The attempt to sell the name is shocking but the idea she's taking action to protect the identity of her rapist is laughable.
As for Andrew Gould's kids, she's kept his name in the media through her interviews, and the ridiculous OK shoot. This article is interesting as it suggests she was denying rumours before they were in circulation http://www.johnnyikon.com/articles/9026-Jordan-is-so-desperate-for-attention-shes-making-up-her-own-rumours.html (apologies for the kind of language it's written in).
I don't think you credit people with enough common sense Cyril. We might not know everything that went on behind the scenes but there's enough material out there that trying to rewrite history to make Kate the innocent, misunderstood 'truth teller' and Pete the deceitful devil just won't wash. I'm sure neither were blameless and both have been economical with the truth when it suits them. If my sympathies lie more with Pete it's only because of the impression that he wanted to stay quiet about the reasons for the split but finally felt he had to react to the barrage of stories coming from Kate. http://www.entertainmentwise.com/news/55993/Peter-Andre-To-Reveal-All-About-His-Divorce-To-Katie-Price
I honestly dont think the real reason is in the public domain, there's obviously a lot more to it. If it was as simple as her having some affair i couldn't see CP holding back.
Not trying to say either are innocent or misguided but its obviously going to completely screw up his image.
No one should be threatened with their personal medical history being splashed about just so the other person looks like a good guy... Anyone threatening that is a low life as far as I'm concerned...If it was the other way round people would be screaming for her blood and rightly so ..because she would be in the wrong
She obviously didn't have an affair or we would all know about it by now.. A "source" would of told Dan Wootten and he would of tweeted it by now . If the stories are right Peter THOUGHT Katie was THINKING of having an affair with Andrew Gould so he left.
If you read:
http://www.thelawyer.com/practice-areas/litigation-/-dispute-resolution/tugendhat-j-allows-katie-price-privacy-case-against-peter-andre-to-proceed/1016358.article
Then read the court document:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2012/3527.html
If you read the judgment you will see even the judge questions this case that he could be wrong allowing to go to trial.
This case could open up a can of worms for both sides.
I'm not so sure there is a 'reason', or a specific reason we don't know about. mainly because the idea of something being secret with these two is laughable, but also because he has built this up and built this up with no reveal, and whenever he is desperate for press he always brings it out, I think anything he says now would be a let down.
Thanks for that info JAL1 .. Very interesting reading
I also think the "reason" will be a let down when it's eventually revealed ..
I don't even think he has a 'reason', and will make some nonsense up. It strikes me as a bit like a bad soap storyline, where a cliffhanger is dragged on and on and the eventual reveal is a massive let down because you know the writers had to make it up at the last minute in order to have a conclusion.
I agree and for reasons that have only, as yet, been touched on and dismissed, nothing bad, but something that he should have dealt with a long time ago, for his own sake
Have to be honest .. I was suprised he named it after himself ( or maybe not)
Perhaps he thinks of himself as a Douglas Macmillan type of person, thing is Andre, Douglas did not name his charity Macmillan that came way after his death and if you're thinking of Marie Curie... you know what, just do one Andre :rolleyes:
Maybe he thinks people will recognise his name and not his brothers?? (I'm trying to think of reasons that are not egotistical, I'm struggling)