Ian Puddick Is The Hero Who Used Twitter And The Web To Embarrass His Wife’s Married Lover (Photos)
IAN Puddick won. The 41-year-old plumber, of Enfield, north London, did not harass his wife Leena’s wealthy lover, Timothy Haynes, of Billingshurst, West Sussex, by telling the world via Twitter, blog posts and web videos about the extra-marital sex.
Ian Puddick revealed lurid details of the affair between Haynes, a high flier at City firm Guy Carpenter Ltd, and Leena, his assistant.
Puddick was exercising his right to free speech.
The affair had run from 2002 until the May Bank Holiday of 2009. It came to a head when Puddick saw a text message from Haynes which told his wife: “You are such a sensual girl.”
Mr Puddick was in the garden at the family home when his wife’s phone beeped:
“I shouted up ‘You have got a text message’. Her reaction was ‘Don’t touch my phone’.”
He opened it. He saw the message from Hayes. He saw images of Haynes perfuming a “sex act“. A
Another message went:
“Where do you want to have sex next? The office, al fresco, the flat or all three you greedy girl?”
Even then, Mrs Puddick says Haynes wanted to keep the affair going. She says he wanted to set her up in flat at his expense. She would be a kept women, for want of a better word. She also claimed in Westminster Magistrates’ Court that Mr Haynes fiddled his expenses to get Guy Carpenter to pay for their dates.
Haynes lost his job at the company.
And rather then suck it up, Haynes went after Puddick. Haynes claims he and his wife were being harassed. The defence said he was just being embarrassed. Haynes said:
‘Every medium including Twitter was being utilised to create information about myself and the affair. The whole thing is causing my wife [Annja Haynes] upset and distress. We are very anxious that, with the graphic nature of the website, that children do not stumble across it.”
Yep, protecting the kids is the last refuge of the rogue. (“It’s not for me, yer honour,my appeal is on behalf of the little uns. Have a heart. Yes, I was cheating on their mum, but they never needed to know the truth…”)
Says a relieved and jubilant Mr Puddick:
“Two years of my life — I have just got it back. It is just a major, major relief.. But there are obviously big legal implications for the press and for the public. I’ve stood my ground.”
We say good on him. The cheat used modern technology to facilitate an affair with another man’s wife and make him a fool. And modern technology did for him. That is justice.
Mr Puddick’s brief put the tin lid on victory with a killer line:
Michael Wolkind QC, argued that his client had a right to expose Mr Haynes’s behaviour. “His websites are his scream of frustration and even his scream of pain,” he told the court.’’ Mr Wolkind added: “He wouldn’t take it lying down – unlike, sadly, his wife did for years in her relationship with Tim Haynes.”
But why did this ever reach court? Why did the police and the CPS think Mr Puddick had a case to answer? Was it because Mr Haynes is wealthy and works in the City?
The court heard that Mr Haynes enlisted the help of leading security firm Kroll to stop Puddick blogging about the affair on Twitter. Puddick told the court that the managing director of Kroll, Benedict Hamilton, threatened him, saying: ‘Do you know who you are ****ing with? Our pockets go very deep. We are going to **** you like you have never been ****** before.’ When Mr Haynes reported Puddick to police for harassment, 16 counter-terrorism officers from the City of London Police carried out a dawn raid on his home, it was claimed. During a police interview in May 2010, Puddick said officers tried to bully him into confessing to taking cocaine. He added: ‘I was absolutely clear they were corrupt, the officers investigating.’ He said his home was also broken into and court documents stolen…
Will it happen again – will the rich try to stifle free speech and the truth? Don’t bother responding to that – we all know the answer…
10984448
Posted: 17th, June 2011 | In: Key Posts, Reviews Comments (14) | TrackBack | Permalink
