even by Crispin's standards...

I get a sense of middle aged men unravelling. Jamie Willis, Crispin Blunt, and one in the West Country whose name I can't remember. To keep it all-party, we also had people like Keith Vaz. And one step further, the men described on the trans-widows thread who forget about the needs of their families and go out and spend a fortune on nice frocks.

What happened to the traditional sports car and mistress? (Though to be fair, I know one or two of them as well.)

And in a Parliamentary debate, he once claimed homosexuality is 'not equivalent to heterosexuality'.
To cries of 'shame' from Labour MPs, Mr Blunt, 50, said: 'It is also clear that there is a much greater strand of homosexuality than of heterosexuality which depends for its gratification on the exploitation of youth.'

This from an article when he came out. In the debate mentioned (which was prior to this) people thought he was being homophobic but maybe that’s actually his view and it’s one he finds acceptable?

Glad he's exposed himself. His attitude to this crime is completely unsurprising, but the arrogance and stupidity of actually saying it out loud is an unexpected gift. I'd rather have all such men in positions of power be loud and clear about who they are.

Is that apology really going to be enough? He should still have the whip withdrawn and be pressured to resign as an MP. Won't the Tories want to distance themselves further?

What he needs to say is that he's sorry for that appalling statement, not 'sorry for the upset it caused'

I think it's the particular case that's the problem here, not the principle. But feel free to contradict me.

I won't Necessaryscene! It's this particular case.

But again, many people are quote tweeting:

twitter.com/CrispinBlunt/status/1513794463231057922/retweets/with_comments

Just on the news roundup he's retracted and 'apologised for the upset it caused'.

Followed by rape prosecutions falling despite rape reports being at an all time high.

Finally he has had to pay a price for his vile behaviour. He really showed the world how he thinks.

With ghastly literalism, Khan actually was 'parachuted into his seat' www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/tory-candidate-literally-parachuted-wakefield-counter-opponents-claims-1318882 (and the previous Tory candidate had stepped down after sneering at working class voters).

Blunt is quite simply unconscionable. Vile.

I am sorry that my defence of him has been a cause of significant upset and concern not least to victims of sexual offences

I am reading that he is still defending his friend

Whilst it is impossible to unsay what has been said, he did need to at least withdraw the serious accusations about the standards of justice in this country.

His credibility is in tatters

He even admitted to only watching some of the trial.

I’m sure Lisa Townsend, Surrey PCC, is far too good a person to gloat over this…

[quote SamphirethePogoingStickerist]Apparently, according to quite a few media outlets, CCHQ had told Blunt he either deleted the tweet or would face some real consequences. Including having the whip withdrawn. Has he gone too far?

news.sky.com/story/crispin-blunt-government-distances-itself-from-mp-over-his-comments-following-jury-conviction-of-imran-ahmad-khan-12588399[/quote]
He shouldn't be allowed to just delete the twitter post and have fewer consequences. I think he has gone too far, but it will be very annoying if they try to sweep this under the rug.

He hasn't said he's sorry he defended him. He's said he's sorry that people were upset that he defended him.

It looks very bad from an ex Justice Minister to talk about a miscarriage of justice.

It's clear that a member of the Government can't be seen to undermine the judiciary, but in principle I don't think there's a problem with a backbench MP calling attention to a potential miscarriage of justice, is there? Although I'd like to see somewhat less hyperbole and a much more deserving case... I think it's the particular case that's the problem here, not the principle. But feel free to contradict me.

It was interesting to see exactly the same emotional energy deployed towards this as he normally directs to women getting in the way of "trans rights".

He’s sorry. Well that’s clearly good enough.

I don’t believe you can go from supporting a convicted child sex offender with the voracity he did, to ‘seeing the light’ in a matter of hours.

So he's withdrawn the statement and "apologise for any offence" that's not really an apology or a man realising he was defending the indefensible

So now he is saying he didn't mean it.

He is just so concerned about LGBT rights that he supported a sex offender.

When you add up all his ranting, its really is coming across as though he thinks biological men that are part of the lgbt community should be allowed to do what ever they want and should be immune for criticism or the law. He isn't even trying to hide it

His apology is a very 'Priti Patel' type one - 'I'm sorry what I said upset you'. He's not actually sorry he said what he said, just that some stupid people got upset!

To quote an often-missed Mumsnet legend with:

"There are no scared castes."

None.

When someone tells you who they are, believe them.