An anonymous writer: How dare they call me a blackmailer?

The rich and powerful use the law's 'morning-after pill', but others have no rights, says the gagged subject of a court injunction

Share
Related Topics

When I realised I could go to prison just for talking, it hit home how scary anonymity injunctions really are. It's not as if I had mugged someone or been behind some kind of fraud. Yet here I was, with the threat of jail hanging over my head because my "ex" wanted to keep his name out of the papers.

I was frightened, confused and angry that I found myself in this position. How had it come to this? And how come I'd been accused of blackmail?

I still had feelings for the guy, with whom I had enjoyed a long relationship, and had decided to let him know I was planning to tell the story of my life. I thought it was only fair. It was always going to be a difficult telephone call, and I thought I had calmed him down, after his initial pleading, threats and a fair bit of bullying to try and get me to pull the plug. I had no intention of revealing any salacious details. I just wanted to write about what happened between us and the impact on my life. But the mere fact that I was going to write something was enough for him to want to conceal this from the public, and, more importantly, from his family.

So when a text pinged in late at night, which wasn't from Mr Ex, formally alerting me to an email, on reading its contents, I shook. I was the subject of a court injunction which demanded to know to whom I had spoken; I was threatened with jail if I didn't respond through my lawyers within days. I didn't have a lawyer.

As the recipient of this anonymous gagging order, I have become the defendant. I have no name. I have no voice. I am referred to as a set of initials. Who am I? I can't tell you, because if I do I could serve a jail term for contempt of court. I'm a nobody. I don't count.

I had no say in whether this order should be put in place. I wasn't given the opportunity to put my point across. If I want a voice I have to spend huge amounts of money to prove that I have a right to freedom of expression. In an inversion of this country's judicial tradition, I am guilty until proven innocent.

It's being accused of blackmail that's the worst part. I've never been in trouble with the law, apart from the odd driving offence. Yet I'm having to defend myself, and prove that I didn't blackmail him. Why do the judges take their word for it, without asking me?

The man who won this order considered that to even have my existence made public would be detrimental to his career. But what about my life? What about my rights to freedom of expression?

I have had severe stomach cramps and have been constantly on the verge of tears. I haven't known where to turn. I haven't been able to work.

I think the 30 or so victims of gagging orders should get together and speak as one body, but then these rich and powerful men would have us jailed for daring to talk to each other. What have we got to do? Jump under a horse like a suffragette?

Maybe that sounds melodramatic, but it's no coincidence that all these injunctions are granted in favour of men, and sanctioned by a largely male-dominated judiciary.

Thankfully, David Cameron has attacked the judges who grant gagging orders, telling them it is for Parliament to decide the balance between privacy and press freedom. The Prime Minister expressed unease about the way the judiciary was riding roughshod over the democratic process and using human rights legislation to introduce a privacy law by the back door, allowing judges to decide on a case by case basis.

I don't agree with titillating kiss- and-tell stories. If a man visits a prostitute, the prostitute has a duty of confidentiality, as she is offering a service he has paid for, and in this instance an injunction could be valid. If, however, he has had a sustained relationship with someone, whether he be married or not, then she has a story to tell. She has her views or opinions.

If he is married, he should take responsibility for his actions. A miscreant can't squeal like a pig after the event, claiming their world is threatened, when they have taken no responsibility for their actions before. Actions have consequences, and if they want to protect their wives and families, then do so, and don't cross the indiscretion line.

What about the worlds of the people they are cheating on? What about the worlds of the people they are gagging? Have they any thought for them? No. It is purely self-interest. An injunction is the equivalent of the morning-after pill. Take precautions if you want to go there, or don't go there at all.

This is a form of bullying from the rich and powerful. It's a back door route to silencing misdeeds when an open justice system should be in place. It's one-sided.

I did not wish to dish out salacious dirt, only to tell my life story – and the impact Mr Ex's fame has had on my and my family's life. My motive was almost entirely cathartic. The fact that I might be paid for it would have been a bonus. Why should I not be allowed to publish? It's my life.

There are two sides to every story. In this case, one side is allowed to tell theirs and write seemingly whatever they like without recourse; the other side has to shut up, for fear of jail.

Some people think I should crawl under a rock, but the injustice of being served this injunction has inflamed me to seek justice. Should we "gagees" go quiet, for fear of the outcome? In many cases we don't have the resources or knowledge to fight, so the injunction goes uncontested.

I have committed no crime. I have not committed blackmail. I have not lied. Why should I continue to honour someone who hasn't reciprocated my loyalty, and now has taped my mouth to protect only himself?

React Now

Latest stories from i100
Have you tried new the Independent Digital Edition apps?
iJobs Job Widget
iJobs General

Sauce Recruitment: Retail Planning Manager - Home Entertainment UK

salary equal to £40K pro-rata: Sauce Recruitment: Are you available to start a...

Ashdown Group: Front-End Developer - London - up to £40,000

£35000 - £40000 per annum: Ashdown Group: Creative Front-End Developer - Claph...

Recruitment Genius: Product Quality Assurance Technologist - Hardline & Electric

£18000 - £24000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: The role in this successful eco...

Ashdown Group: QA Tester - London - £30,000

£28000 - £30000 per annum: Ashdown Group: QA Tester - London - £30,000 QA Tes...

Day In a Page

Read Next
 

CPAC 2015: What I learnt from the US — and what the US could learn from Ukip

Nigel Farage
 

If I were Prime Minister: I would create a government that actually reflects its people

Kaliya Franklin
HIV pill: Scientists hail discovery of 'game-changer' that cuts the risk of infection among gay men by 86%

Scientists hail daily pill that protects against HIV infection

Breakthrough in battle against global scourge – but will the NHS pay for it?
How we must adjust our lifestyles to nature: Welcome to the 'Anthropocene', the human epoch

Time to play God

Welcome to the 'Anthropocene', the human epoch where we may need to redefine nature itself
MacGyver returns, but with a difference: Handyman hero of classic 1980s TV series to be recast as a woman

MacGyver returns, but with a difference

Handyman hero of classic 1980s TV series to be recast as a woman
Tunnel renaissance: Why cities are hiding roads down in the ground

Tunnel renaissance

Why cities are hiding roads underground
'Backstreet Boys - Show 'Em What You're Made Of': An affectionate look at five middle-aged men

Boys to men

The Backstreet Boys might be middle-aged, married and have dodgy knees, but a heartfelt documentary reveals they’re not going gently into pop’s good night
Crufts 2015: Should foreign dogs be allowed to compete?

Crufts 2015

Should foreign dogs be allowed to compete?
10 best projectors

How to make your home cinema more cinematic: 10 best projectors

Want to recreate the big-screen experience in your sitting room? IndyBest sizes up gadgets to form your film-watching
Manchester City 1 Barcelona 2 player ratings: Luis Suarez? Lionel Messi? Joe Hart? Who was the star man?

Manchester City vs Barcelona player ratings

Luis Suarez? Lionel Messi? Joe Hart? Who was the star man at the Etihad?
Arsenal vs Monaco: Monaco - the making of Gunners' manager Arsene Wenger

Monaco: the making of Wenger

Jack Pitt-Brooke speaks to former players and learns the Frenchman’s man-management has always been one of his best skills
Cricket World Cup 2015: Chris Gayle - the West Indies' enigma lives up to his reputation

Chris Gayle: The West Indies' enigma

Some said the game's eternal rebel was washed up. As ever, he proved he writes the scripts by producing a blistering World Cup innings
In Ukraine a dark world of hybrid warfare and murky loyalties prevails

In Ukraine a dark world of hybrid warfare

This war in the shadows has been going on since the fall of Mr Yanukovych
'Birdman' and 'Bullets Over Broadway': Homage or plagiarism?

Homage or plagiarism?

'Birdman' shares much DNA with Woody Allen's 'Bullets Over Broadway'
Broadchurch ends as damp squib not even David Tennant can revive

A damp squib not even David Tennant can revive

Broadchurch, Series 2 finale, review
A Koi carp breeding pond, wall-mounted iPads and a bathroom with a 'wellness' shower: inside the mansion of Germany's 'Bishop of Bling'

Inside the mansion of Germany's 'Bishop of Bling'

A Koi carp breeding pond, wall-mounted iPads and a bathroom with a 'wellness' shower