When Your Story Is Not Yours To Tell…

Leading authors have expressed their “grave concern” at a court ruling which has prevented a writer from publishing a book dealing with the sexual abuse he suffered as a child.

The author’s ex-wife has obtained a temporary injunction stopping the memoir’s release until the issue has been decided at trial. She argued that reading it would cause their 11 year-old son, who suffers from a number of disabilities, severe psychological harm.

So, somehow, reading about the trial itself won’t have the same effect?

Or is it that she knows she’ll get short shrift if she tries to interfere with the criminal justice system, but she gets free reign to wave her disabled child like a shroud to delay her ex-husband from publishing his book here..?

Now in a significant intervention, some of the country’s most prominent writers, including Sir Tom Stoppard, the British playwright, and Colin Thubron, the best-selling travel writer and novellist, have criticised the judgment as posing a “significant threat to freedom of expression” .

Well, quite! It took some convincing for this argument to be advanced, anyway:

The application for an injunction was initially refused by Mr Justice Bean but the mother appealed.

Her lawyers argued that the book constituted a misuse of private information and that publication of it was negligent by the father.

The appeal, heard by a panel led by Lady Justice Arden, said that on these two points, the appeal could not succeed, as the information was about the father, not the son, and because it would be “wholly inappropriate” for parents to be liable for damages over parenting decisions that they must make each day.

However, she said the mother’s third ground – that publication of the book could be seen as intentionally inflicting mental suffering – was sufficient to secure an injunction until a trial.

Is it just me, or does anyone else see the judge’s sex as a reason for the appeal’s success?

8 comments for “When Your Story Is Not Yours To Tell…

  1. Mudplugger
    October 24, 2014 at 11:51 am

    I’m just seeing a bitter ex-wife using whatever spurious weapons she can grasp to get one over on her ex-husband.
    The pity is that the legal system’s encouraging her and others in similar personal vendettas every day.

    • October 26, 2014 at 4:44 am

      Me too.

  2. October 24, 2014 at 12:13 pm

    No not just you Julia, clearly the judge being female sided with the mother after all the feminazis must stick together it’s in the code of their sisterhood. BLURGH. Another woman giving women a bad name as a bitter and twisted bunch.
    I fail to understand why the mother can’t just stop the child reading the book and forget about it. I really don’t believe judges should be allowed to make decisions on cases of sour grapes, andy as you so rightly point out how is a court case going to be any less damaging for the child, I would suggest its double the damage not damage limitation as she claims.

    • October 26, 2014 at 4:44 am

      “I fail to understand why the mother can’t just stop the child reading the book and forget about it. “

      Well, quite! If he’s that disabled, it can’t be hard, can it?

  3. October 24, 2014 at 3:19 pm

    In what way could it inflict mental suffering on a third party? As Kath said above, why give the book to the boy at all? The ‘intervention’ is just a game of ‘Let’s you and him fight’ where the ‘you’ is a court and all its officials, and him is the hapless husband who is now further abused by being silenced.

  4. October 24, 2014 at 7:45 pm

    Disabilities the boy is said to be suffering from – attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, Asperger’s, Dysgraphia and Dyspraxia.

    That is – lack of discpline, Oedipal smothering, inadequate help with writing and being too screwed up to think straight. Guess who’s to blame.

  5. October 26, 2014 at 4:45 am

    ‘They screw you up, your mum & dad…’

    • Mudplugger
      October 26, 2014 at 3:44 pm

      Close, but no cigar – as Monica may have said.

Comments are closed.