Another MP Accused of lying about speeding ticket.
Discussion
Rovinghawk said:
Earthdweller said:
If as she i saying the brother “sorted it out” without her knowledge then she would be innocent ? ( her defence it seems)
"Duh- there's a letter to my sister- I'll open it. Duh- it mentions a NIP- I'll PtCoJ with it.
Duh- I won't tell her anything about it."
Is it me or does this chain of events sound unlikely?
He has obviously admitted his part in it .. time will tell what he said
Earthdweller said:
Rovinghawk said:
Earthdweller said:
If as she i saying the brother “sorted it out” without her knowledge then she would be innocent ? ( her defence it seems)
"Duh- there's a letter to my sister- I'll open it. Duh- it mentions a NIP- I'll PtCoJ with it.
Duh- I won't tell her anything about it."
Is it me or does this chain of events sound unlikely?
He has obviously admitted his part in it .. time will tell what he said
Her defence is more believable than that, whether the court agrees we'll have to see
Cold said:
Is it possible for a weasel to be slimy?
Asking for a nature loving friend.
I assume that you just popped on to the first available thread and this is a genuine Natural History question? Asking for a nature loving friend.
Deliberation overnight sounds like there wont be a guilty verdict? There is obviously more to the case than I have seen although I guess most of that is the defence arguing every single point to the nth degree? Or I suppose it could be nailing ONE point to the nth degree to ensure that trips the prosecution up alone.
Would love to have been a fly on the wall as with the way Politics is in this country right now, I wouldn't put it passed a juror to vote NG based on May's messing up Brexit!! Politics is getting as polarised as in the good ol' US of A - well not quite but you know what I mean....
Slaav said:
Cold said:
Is it possible for a weasel to be slimy?
Asking for a nature loving friend.
I assume that you just popped on to the first available thread and this is a genuine Natural History question? Asking for a nature loving friend.
Deliberation overnight sounds like there wont be a guilty verdict? There is obviously more to the case than I have seen although I guess most of that is the defence arguing every single point to the nth degree? Or I suppose it could be nailing ONE point to the nth degree to ensure that trips the prosecution up alone.
Would love to have been a fly on the wall as with the way Politics is in this country right now, I wouldn't put it passed a juror to vote NG based on May's messing up Brexit!! Politics is getting as polarised as in the good ol' US of A - well not quite but you know what I mean....
https://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/crime/jur...
She's clearly guilty as sin*, but I have a feeling she is going to get away with this. A solicitor gave her brother (who the defence counsel said was a chancer) a legal declaration to fill in on her behalf, and we know she was driving. There should be nothing to discuss.
I would have the entire Shadow Cabinet tried in Diplock courts and have their heads lopped off for treason, so I might be a little biased.
Willhire89 said:
If she could stage a valid defence based on the premise that she as RK had no responsibility for the accuracy of the NIP then she would not have been brought to court - the CPS clearly believe she has.
If she played no part she might also have been more forthcoming in her police interview where she remained silent to all questions.
Well, precisely. If the bro had lied on the form and it subsequently came to her attention when the police questioned it then surely her response should have been "Sorry but that isn't correct as Sergei was back in Russia at that time" rather than trying to keep quiet.If she played no part she might also have been more forthcoming in her police interview where she remained silent to all questions.
In any event, she should have known what was on the form when she signed it. She obviously must have signed it herself as she could have easily got out of it by saying "Sorry, my brother signed it on my behalf and made a mistake, it was actually me driving" is she hadn't have done.
RichB said:
Willhire89 said:
If she could stage a valid defence based on the premise that she as RK ...
RK?
As post above states, if she wasn't 'in on it' in some shape or form, then why didn't she flag the error and state proactively there was an error? As has been stated many times, she is a qualified Solicitor!!!
'Pleading the fifth' and evading phone calls, interviews and ignoring the whole s
t show is not the 'normal' behaviour of a 'normal and honest' person?The new rules alluded to a few pages ago are quite a threat also.
At the end of the day, she could have stopped this whole charade quite early on and dealt with it way before now. She didn't! She is a lawyer FFS.
Slaav said:
No news or update yet today?
Wikipedia's been updated'At the trial, Onasanya said she does not know who was driving on 24 July 2017. She said that she initially mistakenly assumed that she could not have been driving the car on 24 July 2017 and left a notice of intended prosecution to be dealt with by whoever had been driving. Her brother, she said, then likely returned the form claiming someone else had been driving. Over a year later, she realised that she did have an appointment that would be consistent with her being the driver. She said that she could not remember whether she kept the appointment.'
Is the verdict to be unanimous?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff