Another Superinjunction?

There’s a video floating around the ‘net which shows a group of Dubliners on the way home from a night out in a taxi. At the end of the journt the last passenger decides to do a “Linford”. Fair enough (or not enough fair in this case). But many of the postings on some video sharing websites linked the incident to a specific DCU student 

The student, Eoin McKeogh, obtained injunctions against Facebook Ireland Ltd, Google Ireland Ltd, Google US, Youtube, Youtube LLC, and Yahoo Ltd prohibiting them from broadcasting the video clip allegedly showing the event - because he is named on some of the sites as one of the passangers and, he says, that it’s not him.  Further, he wants the id of the person who uploaded the clips to all these sites -under the same psudomname.

Eoin McKeogh has claimed that at the time of the fair evasion on the video he was in Japan (he’s International Business and Japanese in DCU) and has an airline ticket stub ticket to ‘prove it’ and passport doccumentation. 

In granting the first injunction, the judge said that "a profound regret to me" that "this entirely innocent man found himself in a predicament where his good name had been sullied in the manner which it was"

This very strong statement backing up his accretion that he was abroad seems to have been overlooked in many of the court reports on the original injunction which possibly lead to compounding the problem. In fact, even after that statement by the judge on January 11th, McKeogh was still being associated with the fair evasion the following week.

 

He was in court again on Friday 22th seeking to restrain The Irish Times, Irish Independent, Evening Herald, The Irish Examiner, Irish Daily Star and The Sunday Times trying to prevent them identifying him and giving details of the case of him seeking the injunction. 

If, as he strongly maintains, it’s not him, and he can prove it beyond any reasonable doubt, then any publication that says it is him is going to be marched into the Golden Arches and will pay for their remarks.

But the lunacy of now trying to take an injunction to stop these publications reporting on the case is really pushing it. He went to court to take an action against the video sites, which wasn’t in camera, and is now attempting to have the papers not report on that case seeking the injunction.    

Anyway, you can see a video of an incident where the passengers (allegedly) leave a taxi drive economically bereft (here or below). 

*After Linford Christie, the sprinter

Addition: Looking at the Sunday papers, they were nothing but supportive of his plight. If anything, they did more to spell out the facts than many of the reports contained in the dailies on the run up to the weekends reports .  

---