Plebgate - An interesting new twist
Discussion
walm said:
A reasonable amount to spend on maintaining some integrity in the justice system isn't exactly wasted is it though?
Better than giving it to a bunch of feral youth to spend on weed. (Source: the ten mins I spent listening to the Radio 4 program on Kids Company.)
Better than giving it to a bunch of feral youth to spend on weed. (Source: the ten mins I spent listening to the Radio 4 program on Kids Company.)
bhstewie said:
Scuffers said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33854227
and it still rumbles on....
Millions of £ available to spend on this crap, yet no money for a children's charity.
I kind of agree, you do think how much more can it cost and how much longer can it drag on.and it still rumbles on....
Millions of £ available to spend on this crap, yet no money for a children's charity.
But on the other hand I don't want police who lie and if they're dumb enough to do it over something this high profile perhaps they'd do it over something much more mundane which could involve you or I at some point.
Made real by the Lib Dems:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30096956
Shame you can get a bus through them sideways.
The misconduct hearing will be in public?
Will the police be selling tickets for that Misconduct hearing if it's held in public?
Popcorn Emoticon.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30096956
Shame you can get a bus through them sideways.
The misconduct hearing will be in public?
Will the police be selling tickets for that Misconduct hearing if it's held in public?
Popcorn Emoticon.
Edited by carinaman on Monday 10th August 19:39
singlecoil said:
As I recall, they said he didn't give a full account of the confrontation at the gate.
The court case proved they were right, he did indeed fail to give a full account.
The court case didnt 'PROVE' anything. It was the judge's opinion based on a balance of probabilities. Nothing wrong with that anywayThe court case proved they were right, he did indeed fail to give a full account.
If Plebgate proved anything it was that several men/women in the Met think nothing of embelishing and outright lying going by the criminal prosecution and misconduct panels faced by several officers.
Edited by Eclassy on Monday 10th August 19:46
Eclassy said:
singlecoil said:
As I recall, they said he didn't give a full account of the confrontation at the gate.
The court case proved they were right, he did indeed fail to give a full account.
The court case didnt 'PROVE' anything. It was the judge's opinion based on a balance of probabilities. Nothing wrong with that anywayThe court case proved they were right, he did indeed fail to give a full account.
Though actually it became untenable when it became clear that the PM's office considered him a nuisance they were better off without, he didn't need to resign just because some policemen thought he ought to.
singlecoil said:
OK then, on the balance of probabilities Mitchell failed to give a full account. So the policemen were right when they said his position was untenable.
Though actually it became untenable when it became clear that the PM's office considered him a nuisance they were better off without, he didn't need to resign just because some policemen thought he ought to.
That's not what they are in trouble for.Though actually it became untenable when it became clear that the PM's office considered him a nuisance they were better off without, he didn't need to resign just because some policemen thought he ought to.
Once again, you seem to be defending the indefensible.
Scuffers said:
singlecoil said:
OK then, on the balance of probabilities Mitchell failed to give a full account. So the policemen were right when they said his position was untenable.
Though actually it became untenable when it became clear that the PM's office considered him a nuisance they were better off without, he didn't need to resign just because some policemen thought he ought to.
That's not what they are in trouble for.Though actually it became untenable when it became clear that the PM's office considered him a nuisance they were better off without, he didn't need to resign just because some policemen thought he ought to.
Once again, you seem to be defending the indefensible.
But really it's because you police haters irritate me and I love picking holes in your hate fest.
Scuffers said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33854227
and it still rumbles on....
Millions of £ available to spend on this crap, yet no money for a children's charity.
Are these two of the three simpletons who turned up to the enquiry and made complete monkeys out of themselves?and it still rumbles on....
Millions of £ available to spend on this crap, yet no money for a children's charity.
singlecoil said:
And doing very well too.
But really it's because you police haters irritate me and I love picking holes in your hate fest.
I'm not a police hater. I'm not convinced Mitchell has been entirely honest and the bloke is an idiot at best, but I think police lying is indefensible.But really it's because you police haters irritate me and I love picking holes in your hate fest.
At least if enough of you don't trust your MP you get to vote them out.
bhstewie said:
singlecoil said:
And doing very well too.
But really it's because you police haters irritate me and I love picking holes in your hate fest.
I'm not a police hater. I'm not convinced Mitchell has been entirely honest and the bloke is an idiot at best, but I think police lying is indefensible.But really it's because you police haters irritate me and I love picking holes in your hate fest.
At least if enough of you don't trust your MP you get to vote them out.
The problem then will be, st happens, who ya gonna call?
singlecoil said:
bhstewie said:
singlecoil said:
And doing very well too.
But really it's because you police haters irritate me and I love picking holes in your hate fest.
I'm not a police hater. I'm not convinced Mitchell has been entirely honest and the bloke is an idiot at best, but I think police lying is indefensible.But really it's because you police haters irritate me and I love picking holes in your hate fest.
At least if enough of you don't trust your MP you get to vote them out.
The problem then will be, st happens, who ya gonna call?
It's not acceptable to use the job they do to excuse their bentness. That's like Commissioner Hogan-Howe on Radio 4's Today programme when discussing plebgate saying that the police have a difficult job, like the floods etc.
singlecoil said:
bhstewie said:
singlecoil said:
And doing very well too.
But really it's because you police haters irritate me and I love picking holes in your hate fest.
I'm not a police hater. I'm not convinced Mitchell has been entirely honest and the bloke is an idiot at best, but I think police lying is indefensible.But really it's because you police haters irritate me and I love picking holes in your hate fest.
At least if enough of you don't trust your MP you get to vote them out.
The problem then will be, st happens, who ya gonna call?
carinaman said:
Police being petty minded jobsworths allowed to use the tiniest of infractions to score a point is one of the few remaining perks of the job.
MPs being petty minded, foul-mouthed, full of their own importance, arrogant, lying idiots - all on the balance of probabilities, you understand - is one of the few remaining perks of the job ... until a judge rules you told porkies ...I suspect the misconduct hearings for the fed reps will be a witch-hunt.
Nobody will come out of this well.
Red 4 said:
carinaman said:
Police being petty minded jobsworths allowed to use the tiniest of infractions to score a point is one of the few remaining perks of the job.
MPs being petty minded, foul-mouthed, full of their own importance, arrogant, lying idiots - all on the balance of probabilities, you understand - is one of the few remaining perks of the job ... until a judge rules you told porkies ...I suspect the misconduct hearings for the fed reps will be a witch-hunt.
Nobody will come out of this well.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff