It doesn't say alleged or a source on that one above.
It says a "friend" of Peter .. Plus these factors may not be what is involved in the court case ..again we are guessing exactly what things CAN is alleged to of had in the file they were touting to NOTW ..
I recently fell out with a "friend" who told me some very private stuff and would NEVER dream of telling anyone what she told me .. Because when we were friend she trusted me with that info and now were aren't friends I can still be trusted
It says a "friend" of Peter .. Plus these factors may not be what is involved in the court case ..again we are guessing exactly what things CAN is alleged to of had in the file they were touting to NOTW ..
Has it gone to full trial? Is it open to the public? We should all organize a trip:)
(kidding btw)
Has it gone to full trial? Is it open to the public? We should all organize a trip:)
I've already volunteered to attend court and do a report daily.. I'd welcome some company .. I don't think it has gone to court yet ..I would think they will try to get both parties to settle before it gets that far..if I've read it correctly that's what the judge would like to happen
I've already volunteered to attend court and do a report daily.. I'd welcome some company .. I don't think it has gone to court yet ..I would think they will try to get both parties to settle before it gets that far..if I've read it correctly that's what the judge would like to happen
Are you sure that's not where Blondie's gone?
We need some inside info. Where's fly on the wall Cyril.
I've already volunteered to attend court and do a report daily.. I'd welcome some company .. I don't think it has gone to court yet ..I would think they will try to get both parties to settle before it gets that far..if I've read it correctly that's what the judge would like to happen
They need to pull their collective fingers out, stop faffing around, go to court, open the doors and windows and give us some new material.
Are you joking, loads of informed people posting here - mostly from a barn in sussex, but still ...
If anyone did know anything, i doubt they'd put it on ds
Yes, agree. Not sure why you're being targeted here since there are numerous people on this thread coming across as if they have insider info. In fact, some sound like they're actually on a PR/damage control exercise! Transparently so!
But who cares? It's all good, no one is being forced to believe anything, so no biggie. Plus, it's fun to read...
Yes, agree. Not sure why you're being targeted here since there are numerous people on this thread coming across as if they have insider info. In fact, some sound like they're actually on a PR/damage control exercise! Transparently so!
But who cares? It's all good, no one is being forced to believe anything, so no biggie. Plus, it's fun to read...
I've been thinking for a while now that there is one or two insiders here putting their story across (not including Cyril) to be honest I have liked both PA and KP in the past and now don't really like either and nothing anyone can say on here will change my mind, it's their own actions/words that have put me off them. Now it's just a fight to see which is worserer than the other.
Yes, agree. Not sure why you're being targeted here since there are numerous people on this thread coming across as if they have insider info. In fact, some sound like they're actually on a PR/damage control exercise! Transparently so!
But who cares? It's all good, no one is being forced to believe anything, so no biggie. Plus, it's fun to read...
I'd say numerous is overstating it, a couple possibly but I think most have just picked things up on Twitter or DS as it's all been discussed at length over a long period. But as you say we can take it all with a pinch of salt. I enjoy Cyril's posts and I don't think they've been especially anti-Pete, anti-CP - yes, but lots of people seem to have their own particular viewpoint without being on a payroll (unless I'm being naive).
If Gould was at all worried about his kids, why did he do a raunchy photoshoot with KP just after the marriage split? Hardly 'dragged' into the press was he? This is actually mentioned in the trial papers here, the fact that KP herself was putting out to the public, ideas that there was a relationship.
Cyril, can I ask you, why did she not sue for libel when accused of having an affair with AG?
KP put most of the info out there in the first place, an example is this (if true):
[INDENT]"Katie confessed to having the abortion while her marriage to Peter was falling apart, telling all in a magazine interview, for which she is believed to have been paid £50,000."[/INDENT] from here - http://celebrities.ninemsn.com/?blogentryid=530172&showcomments=true
Surely this one should have been challenged?
But according to this story Peter knew about the abortion as he was there at the time with Katie and the doctor. I thought he was more annoyed at Katie selling the story.
The News of the World reports that Andre is anti-abortion, but accepted that Price needed a termination after the doctor told them that there were "complications" with her pregnancy last autumn.
Interesting, so now we know where Katie got the email from.:D
30. Mr Eardley reminds the court that the first part of the claim is not made against the fourth defendant. It relates to an e-mail referred to as the Partridge Email which the claimant alleges contains information for which the fourth defendant is a source. The claimant claims that this email shows that in the summer of 2009 the first and second defendants were improperly collating private information about her in order to cause damage to her. It must be assumed that the claim against the first to third defendants will proceed to trial.
Interesting, so now we know where Katie got the email from.:D
30. Mr Eardley reminds the court that the first part of the claim is not made against the fourth defendant. It relates to an e-mail referred to as the Partridge Email which the claimant alleges contains information for which the fourth defendant is a source. The claimant claims that this email shows that in the summer of 2009 the first and second defendants were improperly collating private information about her in order to cause damage to her. It must be assumed that the claim against the first to third defendants will proceed to trial.
Comments
It says a "friend" of Peter .. Plus these factors may not be what is involved in the court case ..again we are guessing exactly what things CAN is alleged to of had in the file they were touting to NOTW ..
I recently fell out with a "friend" who told me some very private stuff and would NEVER dream of telling anyone what she told me .. Because when we were friend she trusted me with that info and now were aren't friends I can still be trusted
Has it gone to full trial? Is it open to the public? We should all organize a trip:)
(kidding btw)
I've already volunteered to attend court and do a report daily.. I'd welcome some company
Are you sure that's not where Blondie's gone?
We need some inside info. Where's fly on the wall Cyril.
They need to pull their collective fingers out, stop faffing around, go to court, open the doors and windows and give us some new material.
That's what a considerate judge would do.
Yes but he makes out he knows just that little bit extra that no one else knows on DS
Are you joking, loads of informed people posting here - mostly from a barn in sussex, but still ...
If anyone did know anything, i doubt they'd put it on ds
I've noticed that if you apply the formula y=2a to your name you can form the anagram
Claire's near
(not casting aspersions to anyone - just love word games and found it amusing
They would if it benefitted themselves or their clients
Yes, agree. Not sure why you're being targeted here since there are numerous people on this thread coming across as if they have insider info. In fact, some sound like they're actually on a PR/damage control exercise! Transparently so!
But who cares? It's all good, no one is being forced to believe anything, so no biggie. Plus, it's fun to read...
I love that, cool
I'd better watch me back :eek:
THIS.
Maybe he/she does . .. I dont mind what Cyril writes ..I enjoy reading it .. If its true or not ..I don't mind
Unless it's detrimental to KP l suppose.
I'd say numerous is overstating it, a couple possibly but I think most have just picked things up on Twitter or DS as it's all been discussed at length over a long period. But as you say we can take it all with a pinch of salt. I enjoy Cyril's posts and I don't think they've been especially anti-Pete, anti-CP - yes, but lots of people seem to have their own particular viewpoint without being on a payroll (unless I'm being naive).
But according to this story Peter knew about the abortion as he was there at the time with Katie and the doctor. I thought he was more annoyed at Katie selling the story.
The News of the World reports that Andre is anti-abortion, but accepted that Price needed a termination after the doctor told them that there were "complications" with her pregnancy last autumn.
Read more: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/news/a185781/price-abortion-confession-angers-andre.html#ixzz2QAWg90Fr
30. Mr Eardley reminds the court that the first part of the claim is not made against the fourth defendant. It relates to an e-mail referred to as the Partridge Email which the claimant alleges contains information for which the fourth defendant is a source. The claimant claims that this email shows that in the summer of 2009 the first and second defendants were improperly collating private information about her in order to cause damage to her. It must be assumed that the claim against the first to third defendants will proceed to trial.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2012/3527.html
Who's that, then?
I might be wrong, but I assumed Nicola.
Ahhhh.
Um...she works for CAN, right?
Nicola left Can around the same time as Kerry K. Something about integrity or summink.
ETA sorry didn't see SenseiSam's post.
I need a spidergram.
Or a flow chart.