Chris Huhne... going soon?

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

Crafty_

13,248 posts

199 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
Now there's a surprise.

I wonder how much that cost him.

nigel_bytes

557 posts

235 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all

Slaav

4,240 posts

209 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
Crafty_ said:
Now there's a surprise.

I wonder how much that cost him.
Unfortunately I can vouch for the fact that the type of lawyers that he will be using to avoid justice do NOT come cheap frown

It still wont be enough to actually hurt him though - my understanding is that he is loaded?

Derek Smith

45,512 posts

247 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
If we accept the questionable premise that Hune did indeed conspire to pervert the course of justice, there is one eternal truth: he will come again. That's my experience, and the experience of many other police officers.

Offenders who get away with an offence due to having lots of money, knowing the right people, indeed managing to get witnesses to retract statements or using trickery [not suggesting Hune did any of this] often convince other people, and delude themselves, that they have learned their lesson. However the only thing most actually learn is that they can get away with serious offences.

They always do something similar again. I know of a case, no one of mine, where offender got away with a theft from a pub. In current currency it was probably no more than £250 or so. He went out of his way to irritate the officer in the case which made it all the better for the OIC when another PC nicked him for drunk driving after an accident no more than a month later.

In the case of Hune, if he did indeed conspire to pervert the course of justice and does not get prosecuted or indeed found guilty then I have little doubt that the eternal truth will be just as eternal in his case.

Pesty

42,655 posts

255 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
nigel_bytes said:
is it usual that the accused be told that their case will be dropped in a months time?

hidetheelephants

23,731 posts

192 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
He's an irrelevant watermelon, getting back into politics just in time to see his gravy train depart for the knackers' yard. Given his loose grip on reality I wouldn't be surprised if he pops up in favour of fracking and collects an honorarium from some oil&gas cos.laugh

Jasandjules

69,825 posts

228 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
Will we ever get to a time when honour and decency amongst our MPs is the norm?

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

254 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
rofl

Mojooo

12,668 posts

179 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
Most people would be happy to get someone else to take our points for us. Hardly the crime of the century.

Pesty

42,655 posts

255 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
Mojooo said:
Most people would be happy to get someone else to take our points for us. Hardly the crime of the century.
Its perverting the course of justice. We would get gaol time.

He is likely to get off. The law should apply equally.


Actually scratch that the law should be applied more harshly to the people in power who make the laws and tell us to live by them.

Mojooo

12,668 posts

179 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
Pesty said:
Its perverting the course of justice. We would get gaol time.

He is likely to get off. The law should apply equally.


Actually scratch that the law should be applied more harshly to the people in power who make the laws and tell us to live by them.
I'm sure we would get jail time but I suspect some people are being somewhat hypocritical trying to make out he has comitted soemsort of heinous crime when they would do the same thing themselves.



FiF

43,960 posts

250 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
case continues acc CPS


Good, CPS do your best and nail the smarmy git, if he is guilty, down the steps with him.

Mojooo

12,668 posts

179 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
I suspect that he will be found not guilty unless there is some serious evidence or the jury just want bump him off.

A case that is in the public eye like this will have so much attention on it that I can't help but think for the prosecutio nto suceed they will have to do more than they normally would.

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

254 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
Mojooo said:
Pesty said:
Its perverting the course of justice. We would get gaol time.

He is likely to get off. The law should apply equally.


Actually scratch that the law should be applied more harshly to the people in power who make the laws and tell us to live by them.
I'm sure we would get jail time but I suspect some people are being somewhat hypocritical trying to make out he has comitted soemsort of heinous crime when they would do the same thing themselves.
You're missing the point.

He's a watermellon and, as such, any vehicle to get him nailed, for crimes against humanity, is welcome. This is such a vehicle. His crime is irrelevant...hehe

hornetrider

63,161 posts

204 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
FiF said:
case continues acc CPS


Good, CPS do your best and nail the smarmy git, if he is guilty, down the steps with him.
party

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

254 months

Sunday 16th December 2012
quotequote all
hornetrider said:
FiF said:
case continues acc CPS


Good, CPS do your best and nail the smarmy git, if he is guilty, down the steps with him.
party
....Head first, preferably..hehe

LongQ

13,864 posts

232 months

Monday 17th December 2012
quotequote all
Would they let off Huhne but still "do" Pryce?

If they drop the prosecution for both of them might there then be a strong argument to be uncovered that would make most other prosecutions for "taking points", considered to be perverting the course of justice, questionable?

I have no time for Huhne - but then neither do I think that PCoJ is a law that should be used heavy handedly (or indeed at all) for actions following an original technical motoring offence (that, some might think, was only created to provide revenue for certain local 'agencies') which has no "victims".

Sorry, I hate that stupid use of an important word but since that is what smarter people than I seem to want to use to describe some phantom group they created to justify their policies I feel I have to follow suit to avoid confusion.

Mill Wheel

6,149 posts

195 months

Monday 17th December 2012
quotequote all
There was a suggestion that the penalty for PtCoJ should match or be related to the penalty for the original offence, which would apply some degree of common sense to the level of time and money spent investigating PtCoJ.

Soovy

35,829 posts

270 months

Monday 17th December 2012
quotequote all
Mill Wheel said:
There was a suggestion that the penalty for PtCoJ should match or be related to the penalty for the original offence, which would apply some degree of common sense to the level of time and money spent investigating PtCoJ.
Completely disagree.

Out entire justice system is based on the fact that you do not Pervert the Course of Justice. The initial offence is completely irrelevant, and rightly so.


Derek Smith

45,512 posts

247 months

Monday 17th December 2012
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I have to say that as a police officer I was never happy with the idea of a suspect being obliged to answer questions which are then used to convict him, even of a minor regulatory offence. The original idea of the totting up for disqualification was on the expectation that few people would indeed be hit by a disqual. With the proliferation of speed cameras and speed checks, not to mention the dropping of the speed limit, a function of the reduction in the ACPO guidelines, has meant that periods of disqualification have become common.

The speed limit is a regulation, and a minor one at that, yet the penalty can be life changing. Draconian is the word. But that is the penalty for speeding. If the limits were there for safety reasons one could understand but the vast majority of speed cameras would appear to be placed in positions which generate revenue.

A chap at my rugby club ran small business. When his salesman was disqualified he had to lay off two of his staff. This chap drove tens of thousands of miles per year on roads which he did not know. At least one offence was down to both signs being obscured, although this did not sway the court. So the penalty for not conforming to minor regulations was the loss of his job, the knock-on effects to his family, the jobs of two other people and a company running on tight margins having to endure a year without profits. Draconian is a description I agree with.

That said the offence of CPCJ is a serious one and if Huhne did indeed committed with his wife then this is not the sort of man whom we want as an MP. If true it was a pathetic response to a problem.
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED