Bojo in the Dock
May 29, 2019 at 2:00 pm #33733
I wish I had known about this, I would have happily contributed a couple of quid to the crowd funding of his prosecution. Unfortunately I fear that he will wriggle out of jail as he will probably make a case of it being mere political dissembling and hyperbole just like TBLiar.
That said I really hope a legal precedent is set to discourage future politicians from the same offence.
May 29, 2019 at 2:06 pm #33734
keith with the teefParticipant@thinktankForumite Points: 701
Wow. Some one clearly does not want him to be next PM.
I bet. Some where deep down Gove is behind this. 🙂
Oh yes, lardy dar, I really respect Boris, great politicion U-know. Says Gove.
00May 29, 2019 at 2:38 pm #33737
- This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by keith with the teef.
It’s about time they were held to account for the blatant lies that are repeated over and over even after they have been proved to be such. The problem is he’ll get away with it and a green light will be given to really go for it without fear.
We all know politicians are all liars but at least they used to have the grace to look embarrassed when found out and stop it. I know porkies were told on both sides but only one had a big red bus with it emblazoned on in the biggest lettering possible. He made a point of mentioning it all the time in debates too, it’s not like it was a flash in the pan statement it was a key strategy.00May 29, 2019 at 6:23 pm #33745
I wish I had known about this, I would have happily contributed a couple of quid to the crowd funding of his prosecution.
If I had contributed to the crowdfunding, I would be asking for my money back after hearing the “Private Prosecution Lead Attorney” making the case for going ahead on the news!! More errrs and umms and split sentences than a sink estate!00May 29, 2019 at 8:11 pm #33751
I would be asking for my money back after hearing the … More errrs and umms and split sentences than a sink estate!
He was probably being careful not to commit contempt of Court. Thinking about it maybe I should not have posted as I have no idea where the boundary is between fair comment and contempt.00May 29, 2019 at 8:47 pm #33752
The snide forces that be will try anything to stop Boris. He dont fit in with their easy life plan. They STILL dont get that their easy life has ended.00May 29, 2019 at 10:58 pm #33755
He was probably being careful not to commit contempt of Court.
If he’s on duty when/if this hits court they’re in for a problem. If you’ve ever seen an attorney at work you’d appreciate why they are paid the big bucks, you hear them after a trial success articulating the problems they overcame, this one looked like a freshman out of Legal Aid, no confidence in his speech or posture at all. However the “Businessman” that started it looked like a Market Trader in a borrowed jacket that didn’t like ties!!
Comment: I’ve just been looking on the BBC News site to find the clip, but it went out on the 6 o’clock News and isn’t showing there.
THIS clip shows the same guys, but he’s performing better, maybe because he’s reading a script off his phone instead of the impromptu, unrehearsed version first broadcast!!
Edited to tidy up grammar.
00May 29, 2019 at 11:20 pm #33757
- This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by JayCeeDee.
I’m afraid that justice is usually bought by the one that can afford it.
Sainsburys signed a contract to buy Bristol Rovers ground. Plans were made for a new on the edge of town stadium in conjunction with the University of the West of England. In the meantime the arse fell out of the supermarket business and at the High Court Sainsburys got out of it by saying that Bristol Coumcil had put “onerus” conditions on the planning.
The onerus conditions were that they wouldn’t have deliveries at unreasonable hours as the site is literally in the middle of housing that’s been there 100 years. Who wouldn’t see that coming? Tesco had the same conditions imposed a few years before on a nearby site. They went ahead and slowly dripped in the delivery schedules they wanted until it became “normal” in the eyes of the court, much to the chagrin of the locals who thought a condition is a condition.
The High Court decided that Sainburys didn’t have to appeal the conditions nor lend their name to one Bristol Rovers might put in and therefore the contract was void. I’m sure Rovers paid a fortune for a “watertight” contract. They were too far beggared by legal fees to do any more legal fighting so we still have an inadequate stadium in a city location and no resources for UWE and it’s local community. Winner Sainsbury’s ditched a site they no longer wanted, losers tens of thousands of Bristolians. Big winners – the legal teams on both sides.00May 30, 2019 at 1:34 am #33758
Big winners – the legal teams on both sides.
I personally know of two medical negligence claims that went through the legal system – one took 5 years iirc, the other definitely took 7 years. In both cases the final amount paid out was 2/3 of the legal costs won by their legal teams!!!
In one of the cases the hospital agreed to 10 out of 11 instances of negligence. The 11th was intent – ie he let the patient’s condition worsen as if she had died his mistakes would not have been discovered and malpractice would not have followed. He even tried to cover up his mistakes when a specialist was brought in to check on his operation procedures by starting the checking operation before the specialist arrived. Despite that the specialist discovered that he had gone too deep into her neck, removed too much tissue and had left stitches inside that were festering!! To this day she has to rotate her neck before swallowing her food as he left her throat mis-aligned.
She got legal assistance for the negligence claim on a no win no fee basis, but in order to get him struck off the BMA register of surgeons she had to ‘front’ £15000 for someone to take the case as you do not get legal aid to pursue that sort of case. As a result of this she could not afford to take him on at the BMA and he is still practising and operating to this day.00May 30, 2019 at 1:44 am #33759
Yes and no.
It is easier to get your way if you have a pot of cash. But our masters/betters slipped up by giving us a “people’s vote”
Now they MUST do as they are told.00May 30, 2019 at 1:55 am #33760
And this is a sneaky leak.
Put it in politice europe.00May 30, 2019 at 8:25 am #33763
I don’t think this is a “Brexit” issue, it’s just come to a head at this time because of the huge lies told. I agree, let’s get some others “in the dock” too but it has to start somewhere.
There are strict standards protecting the public and businesses from being lied to. Apparently politicians don’t need to come under this type of scrutiny as the public aren’t totally daft and we decide at the ballot box. That’s like saying we don’t need an advertising standards authority because people will see through blatant lies and not buy a product.
The courts may not be the proper place for this, but again it has to start somewhere and the courts are where we sort out disputes. I’m 99% sure that the legal arguments that will take place will result in no-one being in any dock anywhere, but I think it is important it’s discussed.00May 30, 2019 at 8:46 am #33764
dwynnehughParticipant@dwynnehughForumite Points: 887
May I just clarify one important point here – Johnson has NOT been charged with any offence at all – he has been reported to attend court to answer an allegation. A person is ONLY charged when the charge is read out to him in court or when the indictment is put to him in crown court.
The CPS still have the power to intervene and dismiss all charges in any ‘private prosecution brought in the UK’.
The more you meet people the more you understand why Noah took animals instead of humans00May 31, 2019 at 4:47 pm #33792
The VFM AddictParticipant@thevfmaddictForumite Points: 860
May I just clarify one important point here – Johnson has NOT been charged with any offence at all – he has been reported to attend court to answer an allegation. A person is ONLY charged when the charge is read out to him in court or when the indictment is put to him in crown court. The CPS still have the power to intervene and dismiss all charges in any ‘private prosecution brought in the UK’.
Absolutely right but the CPS should never interfere is an otherwise standard prosecution. Its all down to the CPS Full Codes test. First, the Evidential Stage – Upon the evidence and considering any potential defences is it more likely than not that a prosecution would succeed? Having considered the evidence upon which the DJ granted summons I’d say it is finely balanced. The second is the Public Interest Stage – Do factors inclining in favour of prosecution in the public interest outweigh those inclining against? How long is a piece of string? But I’d bet the CPS/DPP will take over and stop the prosecution. Why? Because it is wholly arguable that the nature of his position is such that he will be judged by an even bigger jury than 12 the/his electorate – and – allowing the prosecution to proceed could open the floodgates swamping the courts with similar prosecutions of elected individuals which it is not in the public interest to provoke.
- This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by The VFM Addict.
Here's hoping the Mad Tangerine of the West and the Mad Monk of the East stay friends or we're all in trouble00May 31, 2019 at 5:24 pm #33794
…swamping the courts with similar prosecutions of elected individuals which it is not in the public interest to provoke.
Frankly, putting aside any Brexit aspects I would be extremely glad if the case goes ahead.
There is one aspect of politics that I hate with a vengeance and that is the whole realm of lies, and dissembling (half truths meant to deceive). I think it would be in the public interest to have such action by politicians (and public servants) criminalised as how can the general public sort truth from lies if part or all of the truth is concealed? It is my honest belief that if TBLiar had not dissembled and concealed facts from the public hundreds of thousands of lives would have been saved over the intervening years and the world would be in a better state than it is.
00May 31, 2019 at 7:52 pm #33802
- This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by Ed P.
The VFM AddictParticipant@thevfmaddictForumite Points: 860
I don’t disagree with your sentiments one bit. But Misconduct in Public Office it is not a matter with defined edges. That’s why it is difficult to assign to the criminal justice system. Its very difficult to say where someone lied or miscalculated; where someone failed intentionally or due to circumstance., etc., etc. New Parliamentary candidates are not in public office so would be invulnerable. Worse still MIPO can only be tried before a jury and if its a trial of politicians about their pledges then trying to find twelve good men/women and true with no political biases would be a nightmare.
- This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by The VFM Addict.
Here's hoping the Mad Tangerine of the West and the Mad Monk of the East stay friends or we're all in trouble00May 31, 2019 at 8:36 pm #33809
Repetition of a proven lie or half truth (i.e. gross and persistent) should be the criterion. If the potential offender is publicly interviewed, the lie/dissembling pointed out but the offender persists with their action then that would demonstrate an intention to deceive.
It should be fairly easy to extend this to those applying for public office through deceit.00May 31, 2019 at 9:05 pm #33811
It has to start somewhere, we don’t put up with this behaviour anywhere else. If it’s just ignored it’s going to get worse and worse. It’s a massive trust issue.
Some sort of official standards authority, like that applied to advertising etc. but that doesn’t yet exist. If it had been a published article they’d have to print a retraction, not ramp the same lie up and up.
Saying that the courts would get jammed so ignore it wouldn’t be applied to an increase in other misdemeanours, the cry would be for more resources to deal with the problem. If the politicians can’t keep themselves honest then maybe there must be a mechanism to do so.00May 31, 2019 at 9:48 pm #33813
D-DanParticipant@d-danForumite Points: 1,236
Apparently, TBLiar has gone on record for patting himself on the back because he never mentioned WMDs and Iraq on the side of a bus.
Ryzen 7 1800X, 16 GB, 6 (yes - 6) HDs inc 2 SSDs, 4 RPis - one as an NFS server with two more drives, PiHole (shut yours), Plex server, cloud server, and other random Pi stuff. Nice CoolerMaster case, NV GTX 1060 6GB, and a whopping 32" AOC 1440P monitor.00June 1, 2019 at 12:12 am #33816
Bob WilliamsParticipant@bullstuff2Forumite Points: 3,306
Truer than you know Dan, know it’s a joke but: if BoJo had simply told that lie in the House as part of a Parliamentary debate, and not splashed it all over the side of a bus, he would be exempt from judicial proceedings, whether private or official. The only time that MP’s can be even censured for behaviour in the House, is when they seriously insult, abuse or demean each other.
However, when they step outside of the Safety Zone that is the HofC, they are just as liable as any citizen. As for BoJo becoming PM, do we really need yet another Public School buffoon to lead us? If anyone thinks that TM has shown incompetence and intransigence in the job, well you ain’t seen nothing yet! He is currently courting the lowest common denominator by appealing to those who see him as entertaining. His entertainment value will be obscured by the reality of his performance if he gets the job and he will be revealed as what he really is: an incompetent clown with the political nous of a mediaeval Court Jester.
The truly awful mess he made when he was wrongly appointed as Foreign Secretary, should tell us all we need to know.
“If you think this Universe is bad, you should see some of the others.”
― Philip K. Dick, legendary SF writer.00June 1, 2019 at 12:22 am #33817
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.