mentioning his name here will make this thread undiscoverable through search engine?..
He was convicted for perverting the course of justice. He got an 8 month sentence. He was a public figure in a position of responsibility when he committed this crime. The judge in the case said that Huhne risked a damaged image if he admitted to the driving offence. The crime came to light after he had an affair - his partner sought revenge by revealing his part in the crime.
These are not trivial things. This is not the everyday mistakes that regular people make. This isn't a kid doing stupid shit.
It is right and proper that the search results are not subject to right to be forgotten, at least until the conviction is spent.
Part of me says that there's a public good argument for a search engine consisting solely of news stories which have been removed from Google.
Seems like a popular service for such folk.
Who'd have thunk it.
It's reasonable that they don't want these stories to be the first thing potential employers see when they google them.
Google has been under pressure by politicians to "clean up" violent and privacy-related content, and it seems they decided that false positives are a smaller risk for their business than letting riff-raff through.