TWITTER LEGAL IS NOT HAPPY WITH ME Awww! I’m a twitter outlaw!! 😂 😂
Source TheNational APRIL 9TH, 2016
Here at spidercatweb we do not condone anyone ignoring the highly intelligent, well thought out, fair decisions made by English Judiciary. We take NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANYONE who wishes to go against the Justice Systems ruling. ON YER OWN HEAD BE IT!!!
We do however giggle a little!
View the article printed in the Scottish Sunday Mail on April 10th 2016
If you are English or Welsh,
*DO NOT LOOK*
The supreme court has extended the interim privacy injunction preventing identification of a celebrity who has been involved in a three-way sexual encounter.
The case has escalated into a public battle over the issue of whether or not injunctions banning publication can be sustained in the era of the internet, when websites beyond national jurisdictions can be read in the UK.
The decision by the country’s highest court follows a four-month legal dispute involving the Sun on Sunday. A full trial of the issue is expected later this year.
The claimant, known in court only as PJS and whose identity will continue to be disguised at least until then, is said to have had an extramarital affair with another couple about four years ago.
The couple approached the Sun on Sunday in January this year and told reporters about the relationship. The paper, which planned to publish the story, contacted PJS’s lawyers, initiating the courtroom dispute.
Delivering the court’s judgment by a four-to-one majority, Lord Mance said there was no public interest in naming PJS and that revealing details of the affair would breach the family’s privacy.
“Publication of the story would infringe privacy rights of PJS, his partner and their children,” he said. “… There is no public interest, however much it may be of interest to some members of the public, in publishing kiss-and-tell stories or criticisms of private sexual conduct, simply because the persons involved are well-known; and so there is no right to invade privacy by publishing them.
“It will simply give the appellant, his partner and their young children a measure of temporary protection against further and repeated invasions of privacy pending a full trial which will not have been rendered substantially irrelevant by disclosure of relatively ancient sexual history.”
The one dissenting judgment came from Lord Toulson, an expert on the law of confidentiality. He disputed whether allowing PJS to be named would prevent him pursing a subsequent civil trial for damages against the newspaper.
“I do not agree the trial would be rendered irrelevant,” he said in his judgment. “I would not rule out the possibility of the courts considering [an exemplary] award to be necessary and proportionate in order to deter flagrant breaches of privacy and provide adequate protection for the person concerned.”
He added: “The story is not going to go away, injunction or no injunction … [The children] are very young and there are various steps which their parents can take to shield them from immediate publicity … It is inevitable in the longer term that the children will learn about these matters and their parents have no doubt already considered how they propose to handle it.”
Toulson also noted: “Once it has become readily available to anyone who wants to know it, it has lost the essence of confidentiality. The court must live in the world as it is and not as it would like it to be.”
News UK, the publisher of the Sun and Sun on Sunday, had no immediate comment. It has the right to appeal against the decision and it is understood it is considering its position in consultation with lawyers.
The supreme court ruling is being keenly assessed by all newspaper groups and by any celebrities planning to seek an injunction against publishers.
Media lawyer Mark Stephens said the case could be the most significant since the infamous 1986 Spycatcher case when the government attempted to stop the media reporting allegations of misconduct in MI5 in the memoirs of a retired secret service employee.
“It’s the judgment I expected them to make, but ultimately we need to revisit this area since the last time this was looked at was the Spycatcher case,” said Stephens. He said the same issues about porous information borders were at play
“Then, the House of Lords said an injunction was an exercise in futility as the book was published in Australia and newspapers were bringing copies into the country in suitcases and filming it to expose the weakness in the government’s attempt to ban the book.”
Peter Wright’s book was banned in the UK and the House of Lords overturned the government injunction blocking the Guardian and Observer reporting its contents.
Reputational management lawyer Michael Patrick said the supreme court had made clear it would not be “bullied by the media” but said “it will be a brave celebrity that seeks privacy injunctions in the future”.
Patrick said legal action provided limited protection in the era of the internet. “An injunction granted by the English courts will never eliminate the risk of the story being published elsewhere.”
A couple approach the Sun on Sunday with details of their relationship with a “well-known” married individual, subsequently referred to in a legal judgment by the initials PJS.
The paper contacts the entertainer’s lawyers, initiating a courtroom dispute as he seeks to prevent reporting about his alleged extramarital affair.
Lawyers for PJS and his partner, referred to as YMA, apply for a ban on publication. They fail to persuade a high court judge but are granted an interim injunction allowing them to appeal against the decision to the higher court.
In an anonymised judgment, the court of appeal rules that the Sun on Sunday cannot publish the story because PJS, who has an “open relationship”, had an expectation that his sexual encounters would remain private.
A Scottish newspaper prints the identities (view original article HERE & HERE ) of the couple who took the injunction stating that it is doing so in order to champion free speech and a free press. It comes after details of the story are published in a US newspaper.
It emerges that Google has removed links to articles about the celebrity couple at the centre of the injunction in response to legal requests. Separately, an international edition of a newspaper distributed in England names a blog that has published the couple’s identity.
The Guardian and other media organisations win the right to report on the appeal hearing, which has raised the issue of whether injunctions restricting reporting can be enforced in the era of the internet. Judges delay their decision on whether to lift the injunction.
News Group Newspapers, publishers of the Sun and its sister Sunday title, win an application to have the injunction lifted, after telling the court earlier that the celebrity had already been named so widely online and in publications in the US and Scotland that the injunction was effectively redundant and unenforceable.
The injunction banning the media naming the celebrity involved in an extra-marital affair is extended for another two days by the supreme court. Lawyers for PJS succeed in having their claim fast-tracked to the supreme court in Westminster, which decides the case is important enough to have a hearing later in the week.
Desmond Browne QC, representing PJS, tells the bench of five justices at the supreme court that identifying a celebrity would be giving in to “the rule of the press”. Gavin Millar QC, for News Groups Newspapers, disputes that his clients had been solely responsible for provoking debate about the privacy case.
The supreme court posts a statement on its website announcing that it will deliver its long-awaited decision on the privacy injunction on 19 May.
The supreme court rules that the interim injunction will not be lifted
A decision over an injunction taken out by a celebrity to keep an extra-marital relationship out of the media will be announced at “a later date”, the Supreme Court has said.
The celebrity – known in court as PJS – is appealing against an appeal court ruling lifting a ban on him being named in the media in England and Wales.
The Supreme Court said the hearing was over and it would reserve judgment.
An injunction granted by the Court of Appeal remained in force, it added.
Earlier this year, the Sun on Sunday wanted to publish an account of the man’s alleged extra-marital activities, but he argued that he had a right to privacy and took legal action.
On Monday, three Court of Appeal judges ruled that the injunction should be lifted.
Lawyers for News Group Newspapers, publishers of the tabloid, had successfully argued that the ban should go because the man has been named in articles abroad and his identity could be found on the internet.
Supreme Court president Lord Neuberger announced at the conclusion of Thursday’s legal argument that the court would “take time to consider this matter”.
The panel of five justices would give their decision “as soon as we can”, he added.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36103975
- British court reserves decision on celebrity injunction
- Celebrity Threesome Injunction: PJS And YMA Identities Not
- Celebrity injunction: Man behind privacy order will have to wait to
The injunction has been lifted but the names can not yet be published pending appeal. The gagging order remains in place until Wednesday 1pm
UPDATE: The judge adds:
“The court should not make orders which are ineffective. It is inappropriate for the court to ban people from saying that which is common knowledge. Knowledge of the relevant matters is now so widespread that confidentiality has probably been lost.”
Read Lord Justice Jackson on the futility of injunctions here.
(IT IS STILL ELTON JOHN & DAVID FURNISH)
THE injunction was set aside by appeal court judges in London, but pending an appeal details of the couple can’t be revealed.
18 APR 2016
THE injunction was set aside by appeal court judges in London, but pending an appeal details of the couple can’t be revealed.
The super injunction which prevents the reporting of a celebrity caught up in claims of an extra-marital threesome has been lifted, but the parties involved still can’t be named
(IT’S STILL ELTON JOHN & DAVID FURNISH)
The Sun on Sunday wanted appeal judges to lift the ban on naming the celebrity, who was named in the Scottish print edition of the Sunday Mail last week.
MORE: Celebrity at centre of threesome super injunction storm ‘had a second steamy affair with hairdresser months later’
Lords Simon and Jackson, along with Lady King, set aside the injunction, but the details of the couple still can’t be revealed pending an appeal.
The show business celebrity and public figure will still not be named in the UK press, despite details of his identity being publicly available online.
The Sunday Mail was praised by free speech campaigners for naming the couple in their Scottish print edition.
The appeal could now move to the Supreme Court, with the stay on reporting likely to continue until at least 1pm on Wednesday. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/celebrity-centre-threesome-super-injunction-7773848#XWKF931APZ9iQR88.99
(IT‘S STILL ELTON JOHN & DAVID FURNISH)
Celebrity at centre of threesome super injunction storm ‘had a second steamy affair with hairdresser months later’ 18 APR 2016
ACCORDING to The Sun on Sunday, the party, identified as PJS, started the fling in May 2012 – five months after taking part in an alleged threesome with another couple.
THE celeb at the centre of an injunction storm over a ‘secret threesome‘ reportedly had a SECOND affair just months later.
According to The Sun on Sunday, the party, identified as PJS, started the fling in May 2012 – five months after taking part in an alleged threesome with another couple
PJS is said to have met a North-American hairdresser on a dating app, before a meeting in a hotel, where they’re claimed to have had sex.
PJS reportedly later asked his alleged lover for an ‘intimate video’ – which the hairdresser sent. They are said to have exchanged steamy messages with each other after spending the night together in early May, and the hairdresser claims PJS made them feel “special”.
more:Celebrity threesome injunction: Ex-MP John Hemming calls on judges to lift ‘silly’ privacy ruling
PJS apparently didn’t seem worried about them being seen together, hinting he was in an “open relationship”. The alleged fling is said to have ended when the hairdresser moved on with somebody else.
And it comes after a ruling over whether the famous couple at the centre of an injunction row over a secret threesome could be named was delayed until Monday.
A hearing was held at the High Court in London on Friday as media outlets challenged the order after the names of the pair were made public in Scotland and America.
But a judgement will not be made until Monday afternoon.
It was reported the man had a threesome with another couple and engaged in a ‘naked olive oil wrestling experience’ in a pool.
A judge had rejected the application for a privacy injunction by the couple because it was claimed that his extra-marital activities appeared to contradict his public image of being in a committed marriage.
But he then went to the Court of Appeal where the application was upheld stating that a story could be “devastating”
Named only as PJS, the star secured a legal ban stopping The Sun newspaper reporting on his “open relationship” with his partner, referred to as YMA.
The Court of Appeal said the privacy of the couple’s children was a “relevant factor” in the judgment.
The secrecy surrounding the cause has caused uproar.
Lord Justice Jackson said he and Lady Justice King had decided to allow the man’s appeal after balancing the man’s human right to respect for family life and the newspaper’s right to free expression.
A media outlet had argued that publication of the story would contribute to on-going debate.
They also said the man and YMA had put “many details of their relationship” into the public domain.
more:Celebrity couple at centre of threesome injunction storm ‘order Google to remove links to post naming them’
Editors argued that it was therefore in the public interest if an account of the man’s “sexual exploits with others” was published.
Lord Justice Jackson said both the man and YMA had disputed that “publication of the story would serve any public interest”.
“They denied that the article was relevant to any public debate,” said Lord Justice Jackson.
“They maintained that they had not courted publicity about their private life. They said that the various press articles about them were substantially true.
“They had been in a relationship for many years. The relationship was an open one.” http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/celebrity-centre-threesome-super-injunction-7773848#XWKF931APZ9iQR88.99
GOOGLE IS REMOVING LINKS…
Internet giant has blocked dozens of search links containing references to star and alleged ‘threesome’ after legal requests
Google has removed links to articles about the celebrity couple at the centre of a injunction in response to legal requests.
Searches for the names of either person return notices at the bottom of the page saying results have been removed.
Removed entries on both sets of searches are linked to the same legal requests. However, links to a database which records takedown notices go to pages without any information.
Celebrity injunction: blogger defies legal threats as more papers print details
The Daily Mail reported that an online privacy firm claiming to be acting on behalf of the couple had complained about more than 150 links on the search engine.
The removal notices are more normally used for taking down links to copyrighted information. They are different to the messages Google posts when it removes links under EU “right to be forgotten” rules.
Google declined to comment.
The notices have appeared just days after a political blogger revealed that he had received legal threats from lawyers after he published the names of the couple.
Newspapers and other publishers based in England and Wales remain unable to print the names of the pair after an appeal court ruling upheld an injunction against the Sun, forbidding it from publishing a story about one half of the married pair allegedly having a threesome with another couple.
An appeal against the ruling by the Sun is due to be heard on Friday.
Judgment not due until Monday on whether to lift injunction blocking identity of celebrity involved in alleged threesome Friday 15 April 2016
Three senior judges have delayed their decision on whether to lift an injunction that could enable the media to identify a celebrity couple, one of whom was allegedly invoved in a threesome.
Lawyers for News Group Newspapers, on behalf of the Sun On Sunday, had told the court of appeal that the celebrity had already been named so widely online and in publications in the US and Scotland that the injunction was effectively redundant and unenforceable.
The court is now due to give its judgment on Monday morning and the injunction will remain in place in the meantime. The judges have indicated that even if they decided to lift the injunction, the court would not name the claimant in the case In full here
Irish based blogger to be taken to court over ELTON JOHN #SuperInjunction 14.04.16
Scales of justice: The balance between differing human rights is set to be reviewed amid the ‘celebrity threesome’ gagging order
David Barrett, home affairs correspondent 9 APRIL 2016
The Government is poised to weaken celebrities’ ability to obtain court injunctions amid an outcry over the way judges have gagged the British media in the “threesome” case, The Telegraph can disclose.
Ministers are “actively considering” a change in the law which will stop wealthy individuals – including famous public figures – using Labour’s Human Rights Act to stop newspapers publishing material that is in the public interest.
“It’s an issue which has been under active consideration.” Government source
It comes as a “well-known” celebrity who had an extra-marital ménage à trois obtained an injunction to prevent his name and the identity of his famous partner being reported in England and Wales.
Laws which allowed the gagging order were condemned as a “fiasco” as the pair’s identities were revealed in American newspapers and repeated hundreds of times online and on social media. Read In Full Here
APRIL 8, 2016
Editor’s Note: This blog is not bound by the injunction in England and Wales.
UPDATE: On April 18, Court of Appeal judges ruled that the injunction in England and Wales will be lifted on Wednesday, April 20, pending an appeal by Elton John and David Furnish.
Pop Goes The News — Do Elton John and his Canadian husband David Furnish have an open relationship — or has Furnish been cheating on the music icon?
The front page of the April 18 edition of the National Enquirer, now on newsstands, declares: “Elton John Betrayed by Cheating Husband!”
But, only three paragraphs into its three-page article, the tabloid reports that lawyers for Elton John said Furnish did not have an affair because the singer knew about the relationship.
The Enquirer‘s sister publication, Star, published a nearly identical story in its April 18 edition. Elton was able to block publication of the exposé in Britain, where there are stricter privacy laws. (The court-ordered injunction does not apply outside England and Wales but reps for Elton and Furnish are going to great lengths to threaten media outlets — including Pop Goes The News.)
The Enquirer and Star report U.K. businessman Daniel Laurence claims he had three encounters with Furnish, including one that involved “risky sex.”
According to Laurence, on at least two occasions Furnish demanded — and had — unprotected sex with him. (Elton John’s lawyers denied Furnish had unprotected sex with Laurence, the Enquirer reports.)
The unprotected sex allegation is particularly damaging because Furnish helps run his husband’s eponymous AIDS Foundation.
Laurence also alleges that Furnish joined he and husband Pieter Van den Bergh for a threesome.
Elton, 69, and Toronto-born Furnish, 53, have been together for 23 years and were married in December 2014. The couple has two sons, Zachary, 5, and Elijah, 3, from a surrogate.
According to the Enquirer, Furnish and Laurence began exchanging messages online in 2008 and hooked up in March 2009 at the Mayfair Hotel in London.
Furnish “wanted me to penetrate him and was very demanding and specific about this,” Laurence said in an affidavit obtained by the tabloid. “We did have unprotected sex.”
The two men continued to communicate online — and saw each other again at an event in Palm Springs — but did not have sex again until April 2010. Laurence alleges the tryst took place in the London home Furnish shares with Elton John.
The Enquirer published a Facebook chat it claims is between Furnish and Laurence. In it, Furnish asks Laurence about having a threesome.
“I am getting hard thinking about it,” Furnish allegedly wrote.
“I have to be sooooooo careful.”
The threesome, which allegedly took place at the home of Laurence and Van den Bergh in December 2011, involved wrestling in a pool of olive oil.
Laurence also alleged that Furnish was “into being tied up and dominated.”
- Robert Herjavec has a kinky side, ex-girlfriend claims
- Elton John’s Canadian husband David Furnish in tabloid sex tale
Laurence, who claims to have been introduced to Elton John at a party, took a job at Furnish’s production company Rocket Pictures. Laurence resigned in late 2014 after three years.
The Enquirer article comes only days after news that Elton John is facing a sexual harassment lawsuit from a former bodyguard. Jeffrey Wenninger alleges the singer groped him and encouraged him to show his penis.
Elton’s lawyer Orin Snyder has described the claims of “a disgruntled former security officer seeking to extract an undeserved payment” as “patently untrue.”
The story also resulted in a controversial tweet from a group called Fathers4Justice.
Furnish was born and raised in Toronto and graduated from the University of Western Ontario.
He was a co-producer of the 2011 made-in-Toronto animated filmGnomeo & Juliet and the Toronto-shot 2006 comedy It’s a Boy Girl Thing.
Furnish was also an executive producer of the CTV series Spectacle: Elvis Costello with… and the stage show Billy Elliott: The Musical.
Late last year, Furnish shared a photo of the couple’s sons during a visit to his parents in Canada.
Laurence, 41, and Van den Bergh, 31, are registered as directors of Eduflix Ltd. and Snapfits Ltd., two companies based in Birmingham, England.
The British media is not pleased with the publication ban.
“Man who took part in celebrity threesome says cheat ‘is using children as protection,’” reads a headline in the Daily Mail. The newspaper declared: “Draconian privacy injunction means he cannot be named in British media.”
The Mail argued that Elton and his husband “have posted dozens of pictures of their children on social media and have given a number of magazine and television interviews about them and their joy at becoming parents.”
The Sun, which plans to challenge the ruling, posted an article with the headline: “Gag celeb splashed in paddling pool full of olive oil and it wasn’t extra virgin.”
“Despite the figure and their spouse being named in the US, a bizarre Court of Appeal ruling stops them being identified in this country,” The Sun reported.
“Speculation about the names is easily accessible on the internet and analysis for The Sun estimates ten million users have seen it.”
Many people have reacted on Twitter #celebrity affair #superinjunction
The British press has taken new interest in the marriage of Elton John and Furnish in the last year.
There have been reports that Furnish bought a luxury apartment in South London for personal trainer Danny Williams and the two have gone on vacations together.
Furnish is regularly photographed at parties and aboard yachts with a bevy of muscular male friends.
According to a report in the Sun last year, Furnish is “behaving like a control-freak, exercising an increasing influence over the music legend.”
Earlier this month, Furnish slammed the Daily Mail for an article claiming he insisted he should have an official title because his husband is a “Sir.”
On Instagram, Furnish called the article “a total misrepresentation” and said “at no point did I ever say that I personally wanted or deserved any title.”Popgoesthenews
April 10th 2016
Thought you should know, the #SuperInjunction
IT’S ELTON JOHN love Scotland
The following is taken from the awesome Aangirfan
Elton John (centre) and David Furnish (left) are acquainted with Bill Clinton
David Furnish is a Canadian filmmaker, “now infamous for obtaining an injunction in the UK that prohibits the disclosure of group sex and extra marital relations that he has had while married to Elton John.”
Elton (right) with Bernard Arnault, father-in-law of NATALIA VODIANOVA.
Elton John and Furnish have two children. Their first child, son Zachary Jackson Levon Furnish-John, was born in December 2010 in California via surrogacy. In January 2013, the couple’s second son, Elijah Joseph Daniel Furnish-John, was born through the same surrogate.
David Furnish (centre) making a threesome.
“In 1989, the Sun published a story alleging that Elton John had a taste for young rent boys. “They also claimed he demanded that any boys found for him should be drugged with vast amounts of coke before being brought to his bed.”
Elton and David Furnish.
Elton John and Uri Geller. URI GELLER – STRANGE LINKS
David Furnish (right)
Elton is in the news?
(I’m a BIG Aangirfan fan! But HOLY CRAP! Aangirfan can SEE IN TO THE FUTURE?? That really is impressive! Lol!!!)
Extracts from ColemanExperience
Does Elton John have anything to tell us about VIP child-abuse rings operating in this country?
In 1989, the Sun published a story alleging that he had a taste for young rent boys.
They also claimed he demanded that any boys found for him should be drugged with vast amounts of coke before being brought to his bed.
Elton John sued and was awarded £1 million damages by an apparently contrite Rupert Murdoch.
Was the whole episode staged to prevent other newspapers from ever reporting on Elton’s sick predilections?
In 1999, he caused outrage by performing at a charity concert with dancers dressed as boy scouts and forced them to strip. He was joined on stage by George Michael and the audience included none other than perverts-pal Cherie Blair and Simon Hughes MP.
John Fogg, a spokesman for the Scout Association, said at the time:
“We think it is pretty deplorable and in bad taste in terms of denigrating our uniform and what it stands for. We are disappointed that someone of Sir Elton’s standing should involve himself in something of such poor taste. It linked homosexuality with paedophilia. If Stonewall are completely for the rights of homosexual people, they have not done themselves any favours.”
On the Free Republic website which was discussing his wealth, the following comment was made
” Elton had a powdered wig ball at a rented estate in the South of France a few years back mimicking Louis IV and with all his cakeboy pals.
… and they had adolescent scantily clad adolescent boys as footmen for the festivities.”
On the Snopes message board an even more disturbing comment was left:
” I heard an unpleasant rumor about Elton John, in which he
supposedly buggered a rent boy to death in Brazil, and was then able to
cover the whole thing up by bribing officials. The source of the story was
a friend-of-a-friend (of course!) who works in broadcasting.”
More from ColemanExperience
Extracts from The Independent Sat 6 Nov 1993
To cheer himself up, he became not just a comfort eater but also a comfort drinker, a comfort snorter, a comfort shopper, a comfort bonker: this man could comfort-binge for Britain. In 1975, at the height of his international fame, he made an attempt on his own life, involving a bottle of valium.
Elton recently gave a glimpse of his personal habits at that time, which may explain why Mrs Dwight packed her bags. ‘I wouldn’t wash, and there would be vomit on my dressing-gown from bulimia. I had no life. It was pure craziness. There would be empty whisky bottles and mirrors with coke on them, and I would be searching on the carpet for cocaine. I had become an animal, a pig.’
In 1989, when Elton’s private life was probably not best held up for public scrutiny, the Sun published a story alleging that he had a taste for young rent boys. Elton sued, the allegation was a patent untruth. The Sun was convinced that if they dug up enough dirt the star, worried about revelations in court, would not pursue the case. It wrote untrue stories of how he ‘demanded that the young male prostitutes found for him should be drugged with vast amounts of coke before being brought to his bed’.
It reached the level of comedy when the Wapping lads printed a story called ‘Elton’s Silent Dogs’, about his ‘vicious rottweilers silenced by a horrific operation’.
It was not until he formed a passionate relationship with a young man in 1990 that he began to identify the problem. His lover, too, was addicted to various substances, and suggested that they both sought help.
Under the tutelage of a former alcoholic called Beauchamp Colclough, Elton became a member of Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous and Over-Eaters Anonymous, and has attended no fewer than 1,350 counselling sessions in the past three years. Colclough primarily encouraged him to be positive about himself ‘not to be apologetic about my character’.
So when this paragon turned up at the High Court this week to face down the Sunday Mirror and its suggestion that his self-improvement was all a sham, there could only be one winner.
In court he performed with the same accomplishment that he shows on stage (he is no novice to litigation, perhaps it’s something to do with the wigs). And the jury awarded him the eighth biggest pay-out in the libel hit parade. Then, as an afterthought, the members of the jury asked for an autographed photo. In full @ The Independant
Extract from https://www.bee-man.us/thoughts/th_2008-06-16.html
The Sun printed a story that began, “Elton John is at the center of a shocking drugs and vice scandal involving teen-age ‘rent boys’,The Sun can reveal today.” “Rent boy” is British Journalese for male prostitute. The story gave as its source one “Graham X.” The next day Graham X was the source for a story saying: “Kinky superstar Elton John loved to snort cocaine through rolled-up $100 bills.” Mr John denied both stories and brought two writs for libel. The next day’s Sun headline was: “You’re a Liar, Elton.” And so on through another dozen stories over the next months. During this time, we now know, The Sun was paying Graham X – his real name was Stephen Hardy – the equivalent of $400 a week and taking him and his girlfriend to Marbella, a chic seaside resort in Spain, for an extended vactaion. The last attack on Elton John, published September 28, 1987, was headlined “Mystery of Elton’s Silent Dogs.” It said Mr. John had his “vicious Rottweiler dogs” silenced by a “horrific operation.” Mr. John sued again: his 17th libel action since the start of The Sun’s campaign against him.
For some reason, perhaps because the English love dogs, the last of the suits, the one about the non-barking dogs, was scheduled for trial first, on December 12, 1988. It turned out that Mr. John’s dogs were not Rottweilers and did bark. It also turned out the Stephen Hardy, alias Graham X, had made up his tales of vice at The Sun’s urging. “I’ve never even met Elton John,” he said later. “In fact, I hate his music.” Read in full @ BeeMan: Rupert Murdoch and Elton John
Celebrities and the Rottweilers They Love: Celebrity Rottweiler Owners Like Carrie Fisher, Elton John, Stan Lee, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, and More
A glance at him could make one assume that he handles the ivories with a fervor like Jerry Lee Lewis, but Wylde was inspired to learn how to play by a musical icon who’s also known for his visual flamboyance: Elton John.
Wylde recalls seeing John perform The Beatles’ “Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds” on The Cher Show in 1975. “It was the first time I vividly remember getting chills as a kid hearing somebody sing a song,” says Wylde, adding, “Elton was obviously the reason why I wanted to play music. I remember taking piano lessons when I was a kid. [My parents] were like, ‘You have to learn your theory,’ and stuff like that. But immediately, I was just like, ‘I want to learn how to play ‘Tiny Dancer,’ and I want to play ‘Someone Saved My Life Tonight.’ [The teacher] said, ‘Well, we’ll get around to that, but first you have to learn “Mary Had a Little Lamb,” you have to learn scales.’ I was like, ‘I don’t want to learn “Mary Had a F—ing Little Lamb.” Just teach me how to play f—ing ‘Tiny Dancer’ or teach me how to play ‘Rocket Man.’ ”
Sleeping Dogs Lyrics
You couldn´t find your peace, Within the bitterness that burns
For the Sleeping Dogs that lie, Forever to return, forever to return
Gone but not forgotten, You cut me down just to watch me bleed
Gone but not forgotten, I gave you the last word
and that´s the last thing you’ll take from me
Isn´t justice that you hope? Believe in the story that you sell
For the Sleeping Dogs that lie, They are live and well, live and well
Watch Zakk Wilde. Candle In The Wind. Elton John Cover https://youtu.be/MrYdbqtOkV8
Zakk Wylde: Jeffrey Phillip Wielandt was born in Bayonne, New Jersey on 14 Jan 1967. He started playing the guitar at the age of 8, but didn’t become serious about it until his first year in high school. At the age of 14 he worked at Silverton Music in the Silverton section of Toms River, New Jersey. Wielandt grew up in Jackson, New Jersey, and went to Jackson Memorial High School, where he graduated in 1985.
Wylde and his wife Barbaranne have four children: Hayley Rae, Hendrix, Sabbath, and Jesse—who is godson to Ozzy Osbourne.
Wylde played locally with his first band Stone Henge, then later with local Jersey band Zyris. Later, he landed the role as lead guitarist and co-writer for Ozzy Osbourne. He sent Osbourne a demo tape in 1987 and was hired to replace Jake E. Lee, who replaced Brad Gillis, who replaced the deceased Randy Rhoads. Rhoads remains Wylde’s foremost guitar-playing and stagecraft influence. Wylde gravitated toward a particular Les Paul guitar, which has become known as “The Grail“
Zakk Wylde Solo Albums
Book of Shadows 1996 & Book of Shadows II 2016
Book of Shadows, a book of religious texts and instructions for magical rituals in Wicca
I have drastically censored the pic below as i don’t feel comfortable blogging it without. It can be found online easy enough for anyone to see. You get the idea.
Do I need to point out what is wrong with this picture? WHAT THE FUK?
‘I discovered Sir Elton and put him on the path to fame – but he sacked me in a tantrum.’ Star’s first manager speaks out to beg John to stop the feuds before it’s too late
Ray Williams discovered Reginald Dwight and Bernie Taupin in London in 1968 and set them on the road to fame
He organized gig for John at the Troubadour Club in Los Angeles in 1971 in front of star-studded audience and music critics and it was a triumph
John and Taupin told Williams to name his baby Amoreena in homage to their track when his wife was pregnant – it was a girl and he did
But John has snubbed his goddaughter and spoken to her only once when she was a child
WIlliams was sacked and the star avoided his calls
Williams was upset at Sir Elton falling out with his elderly mother and speaks to Daily Mail Online to beg him to end his feuding
‘I just find it sad that somebody ends up doing stuff like not talking to their mother, firing people. He’s still having his tantrums.’
Elton John enjoying spending time with his husband David Furnish and two children, Zachary and Elijah. The Italian city is one of many where the couple have homes (Admittedly, kids can often have a face like fizz, but that wee boy does not look happy. Infact, he looks worried or perhaps scared?)
Brooklyn Beckham posted this on social media last month captioned ‘with the coolest godfather
Another victim: John Reid, Elton John’s long term manager and one-time boyfriend, has also been ostracized by the singer Read in full here
Elton John enjoys date night with husband David Furnish as they step out for the closing show of Billy Elliot The Musical on the West End Picture of bliss 9 April 2016
SIR Elton & SOME Royal Links
Royal Variety Performer
Wee Willy & Kates Wedding