My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

News

So what makes him different to Lord Archer ............................??

21 replies

SherlockLGJ · 01/01/2007 12:31

Was it because Archer's crime was victimless ???

Allegedly

OP posts:
Report
DoesntChristmasDragOn · 01/01/2007 12:35

I guess Archer didn't seriously injure/nearly kill anyone...

Report
QuootiepieTheHogmanayAss · 01/01/2007 12:35

But it was an accident...

Report
DoesntChristmasDragOn · 01/01/2007 12:37

"was driving his McLaren-Mercedes supercar on the wrong side of a bend when he hit the couple's car head-on at 90mph (145km/h)."

If you drive on the wrong side of the road round a bend at 90mph it's not an accident when you hit someone!

Report
MamazonAKAfatty · 01/01/2007 12:39

every crime has a victim...thats why it is a crime.

i see no difference between Hamed and Archer. i think that it is right that he should be stripped of the honour but that if its good for one it should be that anyone found guilty of a crime has the honour removed.

Report
pantomimEdam · 01/01/2007 12:43

I suspect it's because Hamed is working class and Archer has managed to jostle himself into being middle class or mates with rich people.

Report
QuootiepieTheHogmanayAss · 01/01/2007 12:44

that's what I think pantomim

Report
pantomimEdam · 01/01/2007 12:44

Oh, and I wonder whether they will strip 'Sir' Clive Thompson of Farepak infamy of his title. But I wouldn't place any money on it.

Report
TheDevilsAdvocate · 01/01/2007 12:45

Archer was given a Life Peerage. It needs an Act of Parliament to remove. Other honours can be removed by the Queen.

Report
pantomimEdam · 01/01/2007 12:47

I'm sure someone like Norman Baker, the Lib Dem MP who makes all those complaints about abuse of parliamentary procedures, could introduce a private member's bill. Or persuade one of his colleagues who got lucky in the ballot to do it. They manage to make time for all sorts of useless rubbish in the procedures - 3,000 new laws introduced since '97.

Report
SherlockLGJ · 01/01/2007 12:55

My thoughts exactly Edam, though I do accept DA's point.

However fast Hamed was driving he did not wake up that morning and decide to kill someone.

Lord Archer on the other hand knew when he sat in the box, that he was wilfully misleading the jury. No one got hurt, ?? Monica Coghlan never recovered from it, but then thats Ok because she was working class.

Her reputation never recovered from it.

OP posts:
Report
Judy1234 · 01/01/2007 13:02

I'm not sure of the rules. Did Haseen get something the Queen had the gift to give but Archer was made a life peer on some kind of different basis which makes it legally harder to strip away? Not sure but that might be the reason. Now he's out of prison does Archer sit in the house of lords?

Report
Judy1234 · 01/01/2007 13:06

"He was never stripped of his peerage but has technically sat as a "non-affiliated" peer since his party expulsion."
There was a Scottish peer convicted of starting a fire who I think kept his and also Lady Thatcher's has an inherited baronetcy which would need an Act of Parliament to strip from him so not so easy to achieve in his case.


As you can buy most of these honours presumably it besmirches your name if you have one and therefore no problems with crooks having one....

Report
CatherineEarnshaw · 01/01/2007 13:06

hmmm looks like one rule for....

Report
anorak · 01/01/2007 13:09

Archer is a slimy arse isn't he?

The whole honours system is crap anyway, it takes all the meaning out of it when they give it to people simply for being popular or successful.

Or for brown-nosing the royal family.

Report
CatherineEarnshaw · 01/01/2007 13:11

i agree anorak

Report
DoesntChristmasDragOn · 01/01/2007 13:52

"However fast Hamed was driving he did not wake up that morning and decide to kill someone."

I disagree. If you decide to drive your car at 90mph on the wrong side of the road, you are happy to take the chance you might kill or seriously hurt someone.

FWIW though, I think Archer is a slimey arse too and I'm not defending him in any way.

Report
paulaplumpbottom · 01/01/2007 15:54

Agreed, He had to know his behavior was reckless.

Report
suedonim · 01/01/2007 16:26

Presumably because Naseem has sullied the name of sport, for which he received his MBE, he's been stripped of it. But as imo Archer received his award for services to corruption, which his later antics enhanced, he gets to keep his peerage.

Report
pantomimEdam · 01/01/2007 16:41

Think Suedonim wins the award for 'most likely explanation'.

Report
SherlockLGJ · 01/01/2007 16:45

I did not word my post correctly re Hamed, agree it was reckless but he did not set out with malice aforethought.

God now I sound like I am defending him and speeding and I am not.


LGJ wanders off.

Suedonim, think you are spot on.

OP posts:
Report
suedonim · 01/01/2007 22:18
Grin
Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.