Hairy Cornflake (DLT) NOT GUILTY

[V8RX7]

skwdenyer said:

Indeed. Who'd have thought that you'd be accused, found not guilty, and still be £100k+ down as a result?

Anyone who has dealings with a solicitor.

[anonymous-user]

£100K? Bloomin' amateurs.

[Thorodin]

The snottiness and elitism about an apparent unfamiliarity with legal process of some sections on here is rather sad. But of course isn't that what lawyers do? Sneer and ridicule is stock in trade, which might just be why most 'lay' deliberately avoid any contact with legal lepers. Education might change if Law wasn't seen as such a load of guff and bluster, backed up by an infinity of deliberate loopholes.
Could be a view from the other side of the tracks, and just as prejudiced.

[Oakey]

Thorodin said:

The snottiness and elitism about an apparent unfamiliarity with legal process of some sections on here is rather sad. But of course isn't that what lawyers do? Sneer and ridicule is stock in trade, which might just be why most 'lay' deliberately avoid any contact with legal lepers. Education might change if Law wasn't seen as such a load of guff and bluster, backed up by an infinity of deliberate loopholes.
Could be a view from the other side of the tracks, and just as prejudiced.

Really? It's not a difficult concept, is it? I'm sure most PH'ers are aware of Nick 'Mr Loophole' Freeman, but how many can afford his services?

[rohrl]

Thorodin said:

The snottiness and elitism about an apparent unfamiliarity with legal process of some sections on here is rather sad. But of course isn't that what lawyers do? Sneer and ridicule is stock in trade, which might just be why most 'lay' deliberately avoid any contact with legal lepers. Education might change if Law wasn't seen as such a load of guff and bluster, backed up by an infinity of deliberate loopholes.
Could be a view from the other side of the tracks, and just as prejudiced.

I'm not a lawyer but I, and anyone else with an ounce of sense, can immediately see that some of the stuff posted up here as regards the various trials and judgements to emerge from the Yewtree investigation is just utter nonsense. On what planet could DLT's accusers possibly be hit with legal costs in a criminal trial brought by the CPS?

[bexVN]

I was very happy to read this news, it was good to know he had a lot of people prepared to go to the stand to defend him.

I hope he can find some way to get his legal costs back.

[gpo746]

I think he should front a show about 70s pop.
There is a wealth of material to go on.

[turbobloke]

rohrl said:

Thorodin said:

The snottiness and elitism about an apparent unfamiliarity with legal process of some sections on here is rather sad. But of course isn't that what lawyers do? Sneer and ridicule is stock in trade, which might just be why most 'lay' deliberately avoid any contact with legal lepers. Education might change if Law wasn't seen as such a load of guff and bluster, backed up by an infinity of deliberate loopholes.
Could be a view from the other side of the tracks, and just as prejudiced.

I'm not a lawyer but I, and anyone else with an ounce of sense, can immediately see that some of the stuff posted up here as regards the various trials and judgements to emerge from the Yewtree investigation is just utter nonsense. On what planet could DLT's accusers possibly be hit with legal costs in a criminal trial brought by the CPS?

One where their mobile phone and email accounts show collusion? That's not an accusation, it's a planet.

[anonymous-user]

How is wishing for citizens generally to be informed to a basic level about the legal system and other aspects of our polity a form of elitism?

I'd also be interested to hear what these "deliberate loopholes" might be.

[turbobloke]

Breadvan72 said:

I'd also be interested to hear what these "deliberate loopholes" might be.

There's probably a picture or two in this. So readers can colour them in.

[rohrl]

turbobloke said:

rohrl said:

Thorodin said:

The snottiness and elitism about an apparent unfamiliarity with legal process of some sections on here is rather sad. But of course isn't that what lawyers do? Sneer and ridicule is stock in trade, which might just be why most 'lay' deliberately avoid any contact with legal lepers. Education might change if Law wasn't seen as such a load of guff and bluster, backed up by an infinity of deliberate loopholes.
Could be a view from the other side of the tracks, and just as prejudiced.

I'm not a lawyer but I, and anyone else with an ounce of sense, can immediately see that some of the stuff posted up here as regards the various trials and judgements to emerge from the Yewtree investigation is just utter nonsense. On what planet could DLT's accusers possibly be hit with legal costs in a criminal trial brought by the CPS?

One where their mobile phone and email accounts show collusion? That's not an accusation, it's a planet.

On that planet they might be conspirators in a criminal enterprise or their previous communications might be entirely innocent and above board. Either way I can't see how they'd be charged costs in this trial but as I said IANAL (and yes, I've tried Preparation H for it).

[Ozzie Osmond]

bexVN said:

I hope he can find some way to get his legal costs back.

He'll need a hotline to David Blaine if he wants to pull that trick.

[turbobloke]

rohrl said:

turbobloke said:

rohrl said:

Thorodin said:

The snottiness and elitism about an apparent unfamiliarity with legal process of some sections on here is rather sad. But of course isn't that what lawyers do? Sneer and ridicule is stock in trade, which might just be why most 'lay' deliberately avoid any contact with legal lepers. Education might change if Law wasn't seen as such a load of guff and bluster, backed up by an infinity of deliberate loopholes.
Could be a view from the other side of the tracks, and just as prejudiced.

I'm not a lawyer but I, and anyone else with an ounce of sense, can immediately see that some of the stuff posted up here as regards the various trials and judgements to emerge from the Yewtree investigation is just utter nonsense. On what planet could DLT's accusers possibly be hit with legal costs in a criminal trial brought by the CPS?

One where their mobile phone and email accounts show collusion? That's not an accusation, it's a planet.

On that planet they might be conspirators in a criminal enterprise or their previous communications might be entirely innocent and above board. Either way I can't see how they'd be charged costs in this trial but as I said IANAL (and yes, I've tried Preparation H for it).

Wasn't it not so much costs awarded against (in this trial) but an opportunity for the cornflake to recover costs possibly via a civil case on the relevant planet. As mentioned already the planet may need to be inhabited by Dynamos.

[10 Pence Short]

With no evidence of collision there won't be any investigation of criminality. Without evidence of wrongdoing there wont be any civil case against the accusers, either.

[mybrainhurts]

Oakey said:

Breadvan72 said:

Realist's unrealistic comments reinforce(I think) the good sense of having citizenship classes in schools, to teach people some basics about the Government, Parliament, and (of present relevance) the legal system.

It's absurd that grown adults apparently have zero concept of how the British legal system works.

Maybe but, having seen the black side of it, I'm more than a little disillusioned and don't really want to know more about it. I refer to a judge lying in an affidavit and my opponent's well heeled lawyers instructing private dicks to penetrate my bank account, evidence of this and no action taken against them.

The irony is, I ought to be getting to know more in order to protect myself in future, but I'm getting too old to care....:wheeze:

[turbobloke]

10 Pence Short said:

With no evidence of collision there won't be any investigation of criminality. Without evidence of wrongdoing there wont be any civil case against the accusers, either.

Great typo for a motoring website thread.

[anonymous-user]

10 Pence Short said:

With no evidence of collision there won't be any investigation of criminality. Without evidence of wrongdoing there wont be any civil case against the accusers, either.

What if they were on the phone when they collided? Sorry.

Re loopholes,I am not sure that Mr Freeman is the surest guide to the law that we have, or that anyone places loopholes deliberately just so that he can have fun finding them.

[Ozzie Osmond]

mybrainhurts said:

I refer to a judge lying in an affidavit and my opponent's well heeled lawyers instructing private dicks to penetrate my bank account, evidence of this and no action taken against them.

What???????

[10 Pence Short]

turbobloke said:

Great typo for a motoring website thread.

Looks like my auto-correct crashed.

[mybrainhurts]

Ozzie Osmond said:

mybrainhurts said:

I refer to a judge lying in an affidavit and my opponent's well heeled lawyers instructing private dicks to penetrate my bank account, evidence of this and no action taken against them.

What???????

That's what I thought.