Just a little point of fact here. It's a court case report and no, the media doesn't sensationalise those because if they do, they lose any sort of privilege they get to publish the thing in the first place.

There's a nice handy little book called McNae's Law for Journalists that covers exactly what you can and cannot report in a court case and, for those who might like to 'sensationalise' a court report, there's a handy little thing called the Contempt of Court Act.



Oh really? And that's why I've spent 18 years being incredibly careful about what I write when it comes to a court case including actually, strange as it may seem quoting only what's been said in court! at the risk of a hefty bloody fine or a defence solicitor slapping a massive great law suit on me for defamation.

If you've worked in newspapers for years then you know damn straight that, outside of the national tabloid media, most newspapers are printing exactly what is told to them. Unless there's something inherently different about Italian journalists that I've not come across during my career that is.

As for the case itself. In England there are many and varied different levels to the Act under which he's been charged. Pornographic offences don't automatically get you a jail sentence.

The topic itself. I don't give a shit whether they were 2, 12 or 20, if you put yourself into the public eye or into a community then you have to accept that any skeletons you have in your closet will be well and truly hung out to dry the minute anyone doesn't agree with you.

I have no opinion on Delphy either way, other than that the impression he has always given me is someone with his head so far up his own arse of self-importance that he's seeing daylight.

/goes back to lurking.