Readers of a red top Sunday newspaper may well be reading about a Premiership player and his sexual antics at Easter weekend (2015).
The word “romp” may well figure, as the tabloids are the only place this word is ever found. Fine Easter reading material.
However, the facts behind the case are actually more interesting than the player’s sex life. Watching paint dry would be more interesting, come to that.
The gist of the tale is that Premier League footballer has failed in a bid to keep his name out of the Press. The player had been to a works do and met a woman, a fitness instructor in her 30s. He went to a mate’s house and an encounter took place. (Think Bill and Monica).
The bit that interested us was that the player himself had not even given evidence to the court.
As Mr Justice Warby said: “The most remarkable feature of this case is the complete absence of any evidence from the claimant.”
Not only was there no statement from the claimant about his attitude to disclosure, there wasn’t any hearsay evidence of acceptable quality about what he had to say.
No: the court case was apparently brought by people more interested in the financial worth of the player, presumably fearing their own ability to earn a crust would be affected by the bad publicity.
Mr Justice Warby himself said that commercial motives played “a considerable role” in the case, brought by the claimant’s agent on his behalf.
Proof indeed (if any were needed) that football is now motivated solely by money.