Isn’t it also right that if found guilty the Tory peer will be able to keep his job – like Lord Archer – but those in the commons will be out (if not out at ellection anyway)
Not mentioning the tory though, that’s just…. typical
Can you call someone a thief if they haven’t yet been convicted of anything, even if you do put it in quotes? Another libel action for the Mail on the cards if they’re acquitted? Or even contempt of court.
Anyway, it was Parliament that decided the Queen’s agents (the judiciary) had no right to rule on the proceedings of the representatives of the people (Parliament), so I can see the MPs (and let’s not forget the Tory peer as the Mail conveniently has) may have a point.
Guilty until proven innocent is how the Mail would like the judicial system to be run, with their readers(sic)deciding the penalties, regardless of the facts.
@ Original Paul
Unless the defendant is white, middle class Tory voting, (or a tory peer obviously) in which case the Police shouldn’t even dare talk to them, let alone arrest them for anything as clearly, then it’s someone else’s fault (probably Gordan Brown’s)
Check out the ‘quotation marks’ which clearly shows they are reporting unproven allegations without any bias.
That they haven’t highlighted the Tory peer is probably the most striking thing here. Some may call it brazen cynicism.
And in future I expect the Mail to be fully opposed to other members of society who believe they are above the law such as speeding motorists, people who drop litter, people who beat people half to death in the name of self defence and people who print unsubstantiated stories in newspapers in contempt of court.
According to the latest headlines a Labour peeress has escaped prosecution.Are you all going to defend that or will you attack the descision? Interesting corner you have all painted yourselves into!
‘According to the latest headlines a Labour peeress has escaped prosecution.Are you all going to defend that or will you attack the descision? Interesting corner you have all painted yourselves into!’
Are you talking to us? We’re attacking the hypocrisy of the Mail – they don’t really care what these people got up to, they just want another stick to beat the government with.
lady burglar
To me the point is the Mail have labelled three Labour MPs, who have yet to be convicted of anything, as thieves. Significantly they’ve ignored the Tory peer also charged. This is in keeping with their usual blatant bias as well as being potentially libelous.
As to the MPs being cynical, well almost anybody charged with serious criminal charges would try anything to keep out of prison.
Had they been Tory MPs they would certainly have been given more sympathetic treatment.
The MPs haven’t said they’re above the law, they’ve said they should be tried by parliament not by the courts. English law is very vague about how misbehaving parliamentarians should be treated, so it’s hardly unreasonable for them to say this. Maybe next time the Mail is up before the courts it will meekly accept justice rather than trying to use legal arguments to get the case dismissed.
Disgraceful!!!! Imagine calling Elliot Morley a thief just because he claimed £16,000 in non-existent mortgage interest. Or that nice David Chaytor who, among other things, claimed £18,000 on rent for a flat he owned.
I think we’d all enjoy watching them sue the Mail for libel.
Significantly the Daily Mail story mentions the Tory peer (but you’d need to read it to know that). Oh and I believe the Tory peer has already lost his job and been suspended from the Conservative party – but do correct me If I’m wrong.
I was also under the impression that Lord Archer’s political career ended when he was convicted. But perhaps TedB knows better.
Well all three of these were made to stand down at the next election, along with several others who have since been acquitted by the expenses investigation.
David Cameron if I remember correctly didn’t make anyone stand down, the Tories who did, stood down of their own accord.
And to disagree that this is slightly skewed is laughable, regardless of what they did the point many are making is that they seem to have the three Labour ones who were charged but not the fourth (who happened to represent the Tories) Why would a national newspaper that would probably prefer the Tories in power at the next election do that?
I’m not going to say those three are saints, but we’re talking very small pocket change compared to the millions scammed by tax-dodging Tory or Tory-supporting cunts like Goldsmith, Ashcroft, Murdoch and, by jove, Rothermere.
I take it, therefore, that you are unfamiliar with the presumption of innocence, that has formed a part of the common law of England and Scotland for the past thousand years? Likewise, the concept of “contempt of court” is alien to your understanding?
I could explain the clear differences in law between a civil wrong, which might result in an order for repayment of sums unjustly obtained, and a criminal fraud, which requires mens rea, but I suspect, from your post, that such trivial legal niceties as the obtaining of relevant evidence may be beyond your comprehension.
Parliamentary privilege is to protect freedom of speech, not MPs allegedly fiddling their expenses. As blinkered as this headline is, you and others here are being just as blinkered in your opposition.
Hi, have you changed something about the forum? as I’ve just got this error when trying to access it:
“General Error
SQL ERROR [ mysql4 ]
Host ‘62-249-250-91.dial.entanet.co.uk’ is blocked because of many connection errors; unblock with ‘mysqladmin flush-hosts’ [1129]
An sql error occurred while fetching this page. Please contact an administrator if this problem persists.”
‘We’re attacking the hypocrisy of the Mail – they don’t really care what these people got up to, they just want another stick to beat the government with.’
although i agree, it would be helpful if twits like these three didn’t provide the stick in the first place. Bet Gordon feels that with ‘friends’ like this, who needs enemies
Do you work for this tawdry rag? Or is it just blind faith!
I have no comment about allegations of fraud.
I have comment about this disgusting piece of filth, labelling defendents “thieves” before they have even stood trial, just because they work for a rival party, along with photos of the 3.
And most importantly, choosing to not put a picture of the tory party peer, who is standing trial for the exact same crime?!
They don’t mention the tory at all on the headline. They only mention him in page 6!
Even you must admit what a cynical, dishonest piece of filth this article is?
No mention of the Tory peer who plans to use the same Parlimentary privledge get-out-of jail-free card that these three plan to use
Isn’t it also right that if found guilty the Tory peer will be able to keep his job – like Lord Archer – but those in the commons will be out (if not out at ellection anyway)
Not mentioning the tory though, that’s just…. typical
Can you call someone a thief if they haven’t yet been convicted of anything, even if you do put it in quotes? Another libel action for the Mail on the cards if they’re acquitted? Or even contempt of court.
Anyway, it was Parliament that decided the Queen’s agents (the judiciary) had no right to rule on the proceedings of the representatives of the people (Parliament), so I can see the MPs (and let’s not forget the Tory peer as the Mail conveniently has) may have a point.
Guilty until proven innocent is how the Mail would like the judicial system to be run, with their readers(sic)deciding the penalties, regardless of the facts.
@ Original Paul
Unless the defendant is white, middle class Tory voting, (or a tory peer obviously) in which case the Police shouldn’t even dare talk to them, let alone arrest them for anything as clearly, then it’s someone else’s fault (probably Gordan Brown’s)
@ Phil
Check out the ‘quotation marks’ which clearly shows they are reporting unproven allegations without any bias.
That they haven’t highlighted the Tory peer is probably the most striking thing here. Some may call it brazen cynicism.
And in future I expect the Mail to be fully opposed to other members of society who believe they are above the law such as speeding motorists, people who drop litter, people who beat people half to death in the name of self defence and people who print unsubstantiated stories in newspapers in contempt of court.
According to the latest headlines a Labour peeress has escaped prosecution.Are you all going to defend that or will you attack the descision? Interesting corner you have all painted yourselves into!
‘According to the latest headlines a Labour peeress has escaped prosecution.Are you all going to defend that or will you attack the descision? Interesting corner you have all painted yourselves into!’
Are you talking to us? We’re attacking the hypocrisy of the Mail – they don’t really care what these people got up to, they just want another stick to beat the government with.
£200 worth of plants?!?
Is it opium?
lady burglar
To me the point is the Mail have labelled three Labour MPs, who have yet to be convicted of anything, as thieves. Significantly they’ve ignored the Tory peer also charged. This is in keeping with their usual blatant bias as well as being potentially libelous.
As to the MPs being cynical, well almost anybody charged with serious criminal charges would try anything to keep out of prison.
Had they been Tory MPs they would certainly have been given more sympathetic treatment.
The MPs haven’t said they’re above the law, they’ve said they should be tried by parliament not by the courts. English law is very vague about how misbehaving parliamentarians should be treated, so it’s hardly unreasonable for them to say this. Maybe next time the Mail is up before the courts it will meekly accept justice rather than trying to use legal arguments to get the case dismissed.
The quotes mean nothing, it’s the same as the “allegedly” defence, it’s implied guilt so is probably breaking the law.
Disgraceful!!!! Imagine calling Elliot Morley a thief just because he claimed £16,000 in non-existent mortgage interest. Or that nice David Chaytor who, among other things, claimed £18,000 on rent for a flat he owned.
I think we’d all enjoy watching them sue the Mail for libel.
Significantly the Daily Mail story mentions the Tory peer (but you’d need to read it to know that). Oh and I believe the Tory peer has already lost his job and been suspended from the Conservative party – but do correct me If I’m wrong.
I was also under the impression that Lord Archer’s political career ended when he was convicted. But perhaps TedB knows better.
Well all three of these were made to stand down at the next election, along with several others who have since been acquitted by the expenses investigation.
David Cameron if I remember correctly didn’t make anyone stand down, the Tories who did, stood down of their own accord.
And to disagree that this is slightly skewed is laughable, regardless of what they did the point many are making is that they seem to have the three Labour ones who were charged but not the fourth (who happened to represent the Tories) Why would a national newspaper that would probably prefer the Tories in power at the next election do that?
The answer isn’t rocket science
lets hope the conservatives get in.At least they will put right(yet again) what a labour crowd of placemen have visited on my country.
I’m not going to say those three are saints, but we’re talking very small pocket change compared to the millions scammed by tax-dodging Tory or Tory-supporting cunts like Goldsmith, Ashcroft, Murdoch and, by jove, Rothermere.
For once I agree with the Mail. I just think they shouldn’t put ‘Thieves’ in inverted commas in the headline.
Neville:
I take it, therefore, that you are unfamiliar with the presumption of innocence, that has formed a part of the common law of England and Scotland for the past thousand years? Likewise, the concept of “contempt of court” is alien to your understanding?
I could explain the clear differences in law between a civil wrong, which might result in an order for repayment of sums unjustly obtained, and a criminal fraud, which requires mens rea, but I suspect, from your post, that such trivial legal niceties as the obtaining of relevant evidence may be beyond your comprehension.
Lets hope the conservatives get in. At least they will put right (yet again) what a Labour crowd of placemen have visited on my country.
Wow, didn’t realise this was your country. I’ve never seen you on any money.
@pstu
Parliamentary privilege is to protect freedom of speech, not MPs allegedly fiddling their expenses. As blinkered as this headline is, you and others here are being just as blinkered in your opposition.
Hi, have you changed something about the forum? as I’ve just got this error when trying to access it:
“General Error
SQL ERROR [ mysql4 ]
Host ‘62-249-250-91.dial.entanet.co.uk’ is blocked because of many connection errors; unblock with ‘mysqladmin flush-hosts’ [1129]
An sql error occurred while fetching this page. Please contact an administrator if this problem persists.”
It worked yesterday.
Not sure what’s happening at the moment. Merk will fix it though, he always does
‘We’re attacking the hypocrisy of the Mail – they don’t really care what these people got up to, they just want another stick to beat the government with.’
although i agree, it would be helpful if twits like these three didn’t provide the stick in the first place. Bet Gordon feels that with ‘friends’ like this, who needs enemies
23.51 14032010 forum still busted.
Karlo
Do you work for this tawdry rag? Or is it just blind faith!
I have no comment about allegations of fraud.
I have comment about this disgusting piece of filth, labelling defendents “thieves” before they have even stood trial, just because they work for a rival party, along with photos of the 3.
And most importantly, choosing to not put a picture of the tory party peer, who is standing trial for the exact same crime?!
They don’t mention the tory at all on the headline. They only mention him in page 6!
Even you must admit what a cynical, dishonest piece of filth this article is?
Cameron and Osborne are borderline “thieves” if you ask me. They only got away with it as they didn’t run a hard line on the mortgage interest cheats.
Cameron was claiming £23k a year mortgage interest a year, for nearly a decade.
He was taking out tax payer discounted mortgages, and then using the money to pay off mortgages on private properties.
He paid off the mortgage to his own home, in full, within 6 months of taking out a £800k tax payer mortgage