gotta disagree with ya there Blizzie .. 
OK, maybe 90% is too high, but I still think that someone who has made marriage vows and has kids and is quite a bit older (maybe), should take more of the blame.
Yes, they could both have said, "No", but he is the one risking hurting the people closest to him.
Who knows, maybe he even used the "My wife doesn't understand me/We are just staying together for the kids/She isn't interested in me, physically" lines! 
I agree with Blizz she should not have went near him but he is the one with wife and kids,they are his responsibility. Imogen will move on to her next conquest just because she can she has no one else to consider but herself..
I agree with Blizz she should not have went near him but he is the one with wife and kids,they are his responsibility. Imogen will move on to her next conquest just because she can she has no one else to consider but herself..
Exactly. 
I agree with Blizz too! 
gotta disagree with ya there Blizzie ..
OK, maybe 90% is too high, but I still think that someone who has made marriage vows and has kids and is quite a bit older (maybe), should take more of the blame.
Yes, they could both have said, "No", but he is the one risking hurting the people closest to him.
Who knows, maybe he even used the "My wife doesn't understand me/We are just staying together for the kids/She isn't interested in me, physically" lines!
but she contributed to the wife's hurt by not saying no. .which is why i think they are both to blame equally... without one asking or flirting and one not saying no it would never have happened.. 
if he used the famous 'we are only staying for the children' line then she should have said ok let me phone your wife and check that it's ok with her then.. or he could have phoned the wife to ask her to prove it...
we usually agree on a lot of stuff tho.. but this time I can't put the blame more on one or t'other so will have to still disagree 
I think it stinks that only one party got named tho. . should have been both or neither . .preferably neither cos of the wife and kid and what that sort of thing would do to them..
I agree with Blizz she should not have went near him but he is the one with wife and kids,they are his responsibility. Imogen will move on to her next conquest just because she can she has no one else to consider but herself..
he'll probably move on to another conquest too
I think it stinks that only one party got named tho. . should have been both or neither . .preferably neither cos of the wife and kid and what that sort of thing would do to them..
I can agree on that! 
the actor is rumoured to be Hugh Bonneville.
Went to Google Realtime and Ryan Giggs is the footballer mentioned to have the injunction.
They are saying Ryan Giggs had a bad night ,,but cant imogen why
I think it stinks that only one party got named tho. . should have been both or neither . .preferably neither cos of the wife and kid and what that sort of thing would do to them..
I can agree on that!
sorted
Another injunction has been given ,latest is Alan Shearer/Gaby Logan.
I agree with Blizz she should not have went near him but he is the one with wife and kids,they are his responsibility. Imogen will move on to her next conquest just because she can she has no one else to consider but herself..
he'll probably move on to another conquest too
Agreed
I don't think it's right that she is the only one being dragged through the tabloids, but as for guilt, they have to share it. She might be a bit naive, but not enough to fall for 'my wife doesn't understand me'. She has a living to make and agony aunt doesn't come into it.
He plays for United... they do what they want.
Edit: They do what they're told 
Quite a few Man U supporters on here
The injunction - which prevents The Sun naming the married multi-millionaire footballer she had an affair with - was upheld by Mr Justice Eady.
The ex-Big Brother babe said there was "something seriously wrong with the law" after the high court judgement today, which heard arguments from lawyers representing the household name, his lover and The Sun.
The 28-year-old said: "Yet again my name and reputation have been trashed while the man I had a relationship with is able to hide."
"What's more I can't even defend myself because I have been gagged. If this is the way privacy injunctions are supposed to work there is something seriously wrong with the law.
"I have read the judgment and I am stunned by how I am portrayed."
The judge said he granted the original injunction because he believed the footballer "may well have been set up" so that photographs could be taken of Imogen going to hotels for meetings with the star.
It was claimed that Imogen had asked the footballer for ÂĢ100,000 - and that this may have suggested the footballer was being blackmailed.
The judge said: "I hasten to add, as is obvious, that I cannot come to any final conclusion about it at this stage."
The footballers' lawyers first began legal proceedings after The Sun revealed the hushed up affair between Imogen and the soccer star on April 14.
They also applied for a temporary injunction after learning Imogen had enlisted the help of PR guru Max Clifford.
The world famous ace - described as a "family man" made a statement saying he had met Imogen last September and on two other occasions in November and December.
The judge said: "The footballer's witness statement was to the effect that Ms Thomas had made contact with him by various text messages in March, which led him to conclude that she was at the stage of thinking of selling her story, such as it was.
"She told him by this means that she wanted, or 'needed', a payment from him of ÂĢ50,000."
The court heard the footballer agreed, with some reluctance, to meet Imogen in a hotel he was staying in to discuss her demands.
"Although he had no wish to meet, he eventually agreed because he was concerned that she would go to the newspapers if he refused," Mr Justice Eady said.
The court heard how the footballer refused to pay the lad's mag model in return for her silence, but gave her a signed football shirt instead.
A few days later, it was claimed Imogen asked to see him again, in a different hotel, and on this occasion, as she had requested, he provided her with some football tickets.
On April 12, he texted Imogen saying he did not want any further contact with her but thought better of it and messaged her the following day.
However, it was claimed that Imogen then made it clear she was looking for ÂĢ100,000 before texting to say that a journalist was outside her home.
But David Price, for Imogen, told the court that his client denied 'causing the publication' in The Sun or asking the footballer for money.
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/ho...d.html#ixzz1MXHm4pyH
Looks like she may not be as innocent as she is making out. I know it is the Sun that this article has come from, but I also heard something on the news. I think she played with fire knowingly going after a married family man ( yes he is just as guilty), and she has been baddly burnt.
Court document
 |
There you go Erin. I always knew there was more to this than the Virginial Imogen and her modest lifestyle.
There you go Erin. I always knew there was more to this than the Virginial Imogen and her modest lifestyle.
I have no sympathy for the guy involved ,but delighted Imogen gets zero money.She will be gutted as not one footballer will go near her,doubt anyone in the public eye will.
Time for her to get a real job.
Imogen Thomas is not allowed to name the married premiership footballer she's been having an affair with.
In unrelated news, as part of her new singing career she's been doing Giggs in Manchester.
Hee hee,pirate. All these "poor" footballers etc getting their arms forced up their backs and frogmarched into "affairs".hah!
Imogen Thomas is not allowed to name the married premiership footballer she's been having an affair with.
In unrelated news, as part of her new singing career she's been doing Giggs in Manchester.
ROFFLES
The court heard how the footballer refused to pay the lad's mag model in return for her silence, but gave her a signed football shirt instead.
A few days later, it was claimed Imogen asked to see him again, in a different hotel, and on this occasion, as she had requested, he provided her with some football tickets.
..Oh please make it stop..
Mr Memorabilia........AKT!!!!..where's that BS smilie of yours....
 | stonks  Member | Today at 6:55 PM |
The court heard how the footballer refused to pay the lad's mag model in return for her silence, but gave her a signed football shirt instead.
A few days later, it was claimed Imogen asked to see him again, in a different hotel, and on this occasion, as she had requested, he provided her with some football tickets.
..Oh please make it stop..
Mr Memorabilia........AKT!!!!..where's that BS smilie of yours...
You couldn't make it up Stonks could you...........
I think that Imogen and 'the mysterious unknown footie player' are as rancid as each other when oush comes to shove, and they should BOTH be stuck on the front pages of the rags.
True Sparkles I agree with you. But the fact he gave her a signed shirt means that she will forever be able to look at it in private, but never be able to sell it and make some cash from it, because she can't reveal his name, so don't be looking on Ebay anytime soon...............
I have to say this...............Who the bliddy hell cares, except his wife and kids?
| stonks Member | Today at 6:55 PM |
The court heard how the footballer refused to pay the lad's mag model in return for her silence, but gave her a signed football shirt instead.
A few days later, it was claimed Imogen asked to see him again, in a different hotel, and on this occasion, as she had requested, he provided her with some football tickets.
..Oh please make it stop..
Mr Memorabilia........AKT!!!!..where's that BS smilie of yours...
You couldn't make it up Stonks could you...........
I've heard some lies and excuses in my life but his takes the biscuit sweet....
do you think imogen will go on a 'slut' march?
closely followed by her footballer boyfriend in drag
do you think imogen will go on a 'slut' march?
closely followed by her footballer boyfriend in drag
Please don't let it be televised..............
I have to say this...............Who the bliddy hell cares, except his wife and kids?
Quite.
Its boring already.
I still cant believe any of you actually believed her side of events in the first place, all this nonsense that "he told her he loved her and that he was going to run away with her", shes either lying to gain support and sympathy (plus a shit load of tabloid cash) or shes the DUMBEST woman ever to come out of Wales.
Thats because you are trash love.
Well the world and his dog knows who he is so the injuction hasn't worked.Just stopped Murdochs rags printing it.
True Katty. I saw her in this morning and she was in bits crying, and she is wanting her day in court to try and clear her name. She said at no time did she try and blackmail him, and she wants to get this sorted and she is going to take it all the way. I am assuming that she must have someone with wads of spare cash behind her to fund this high court mularky, as she was saying the other week that she can't afford super injunctions, so, I am assuming it is someone with an axe to grind with him who's name cannot be spoken.
I saw her on this morning today and i have to say i felt for her. Im no great fan of Imogen but I totally believed what she was saying. It was clear to see she was furious, and even the tears were brought on by pure anger. I do 100% believe what she said.
On the whole argument of who is to blame, he is, she didn't have an 'affair' she had a relationship, he had the affair. It was him who made vows to his wife, not her. Its not right what she did but she made no promises to the woman he was married to.
Totally agree Gypsie, I too believe what she said, and you are right, He had the affair, but, she knew she was playing with fire right from the word go, as she would not have only met him in hotels, and snuck about behind his wifes, and the medias back.
