Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Brexit
Original poster

Westministenders: The Only Election That Matters - The Tory One

964 replies

RedToothBrush · 28/05/2019 15:57

Fallout from the Euro Elections makes for interesting reading for the leadership hopefuls.

Its not a clear cut as some make out. There is still a case for a deal. The trouble is passing it through parliament. And there is no time to do that. Nor no will.

Any new leader's priority isn't going to be a deal. Its going to be avoiding a General Election. And thats going to be hard.

We are also realistically facing the prospect of another extension which France is likely to block leading to no deal or no deal.

Or a 2nd Referendum.

A 2nd Referendum might be the only way to avoid a General Election. And that will still have no deal on the ballot. Of that you can be sure.

Peter Foster of the Telegraph remarked this morning that in fact the only way to a deal now, might well be via no deal, because of all the routes we have exhausted through incompetence. And that will come at a very high price.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
22
Icantreachthepretzels · 29/05/2019 17:11

I'm not optimistic for the outcome! But, nevertheless, I think it has it's place in our system.

DGRossetti · 29/05/2019 17:12

I've only skim read the judgment but a few things jump out:

  1. Boris is being targeted because he was Mayor

  2. his defence have tried - subtly, but not unnoticed - to suggest this the courts aren't really up to this sort of thing.

  3. the defence are trying to impugn the motives of the prosecution as a defence in itself.

If I were Boris, I would really take notice. The judge has really done his homework (to be expected). If I were him I'd really take his briefs advice. This isn't going away quietly.

DGRossetti · 29/05/2019 17:14

In BJ's defence there will be Lord Denning's "Fare's Fair" judgement on Ken Livingstone's GLC promise to cut bus fares, which Denning said was a manifesto promise and so not a promise at all, and so the Tory Govt. could block it.

That judgement eventually rested on Bromley not having any tube stations, as I recall. Also, no matter what a manifesto promise is, it can't break the law. However, it can change the law, as long is that is by due process.

DGRossetti · 29/05/2019 17:15

Lord Denning

was a bit of a cunt, let's not forget.

1tisILeClerc · 29/05/2019 17:30

For Basilpots

Violetparis · 29/05/2019 17:31

I have started following Rory Stewart on Twitter and I like him, think he will come across well in the televised hustings. Probably stands no chance in the leadership competition against the hard leavers but he may introduce a more calm, rational voice to the debate.

NoWordForFluffy · 29/05/2019 17:37

Unlikely. At this level, you are really into specialism - something which counts against Boris, as there won't really be much expertise in this area. Luckily since Goves declaration that we are sick of experts that won't be a problem.

You do her a disservice. I'm sure she'll be able to tell me how often things get thrown out before even getting in front of a jury.

And isn't the previous judge a woman? I'm pretty sure Margot is a female name (apologies to any male Margots out there!).

Bearing in mind how well analysed the matter has been, I'd be disappointed if this didn't get in front of a jury. Boris' expensive legal team didn't avert this crisis, after all.

DGRossetti · 29/05/2019 17:38

In theory, but which tyrants have been brought down by judges DGR?

Not an answer, but a reflection.

www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/letter-trial-by-jury-1094823.html

Sir: The late Lord Devlin, arguably the greatest judge of the century, was a powerful defender of trial by jury.

He said: "Each jury is a little parliament. The jury sense is the parliamentary sense. I cannot see the one dying and the other surviving. The first object of any tyrant in Whitehall would be to make parliament utterly subservient to his will; and the next to overthrow or diminish trial by jury, for no tyrant could afford to leave a subject's freedom in the hands of 12 of his countrymen. So that trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than one wheel of the constitution; it is the lamp that shows that freedom lives."

prettybird · 29/05/2019 17:40

JRM currently on Sky News condoning lying in public office saying that the judiciary and politicians work in different spheres and they shouldn't overlap. ConfusedAngry

Fair enough: but then politicians. Shouldn't. Fuckin. Lie. Angry

Typical though of JRM: happy to snipe from the snidelines (my new expression: meaning he is happy to stand on the sidelines and sneer but never actually take responsibility Hmm)

1tisILeClerc · 29/05/2019 17:40

{btw, to @1tisILeClerc, I'm not a lawyer, just a very fast reader used to debugging shit }
I too 'debug' things but am currently trying to keep up with this thread, work and plan tomorrows food poisoning.
The latter being most likely by the smell of things.

Basilpots · 29/05/2019 17:40

Tis he certainly will be.

DGRossetti · 29/05/2019 17:41

You do her a disservice. I'm sure she'll be able to tell me how often things get thrown out before even getting in front of a jury.

It wasn't an intentional slight. Just noting that lawyers have made law so complicated, even some lawyers don't fully get it all ... apologies if needed ....

DGRossetti · 29/05/2019 17:42

JRM currently on Sky News condoning lying in public office saying that the judiciary and politicians work in different spheres and they shouldn't overlap.

For one who tells us how clever he is, he doesn't really "get" the separation of powers, does he ? It's not a doctrine that courts can't try politicians for a start.

NoWordForFluffy · 29/05/2019 17:47

Just noting that lawyers have made law so complicated, even some lawyers don't fully get it all ... apologies if needed

It's not us lawyers who make things complicated (unless you're the charge £200 per hour type who benefits from making things more convoluted than necessary!), it's the bloody statute writers who have clearly never heard of the Plain English Campaign!

However, this offence actually seems very precise in its definition, helpfully. So as long as the evidence is there and Boris doesn't have a reasonable explanation, he may be on a sticky wicket.

Though, of course, the evidential bar is 'beyond reasonable doubt', not the civil law standard of 'balance of probabilities', so it may be that element which the defence team somehow manage to persuade the jury isn't made out.

prettybird · 29/05/2019 17:48

I'm sure JRM is fully aware of the separation of powers - but he had a platform where he can obfuscate and try to con the viewers that politicians and the legal system "should" operate in separate spheres and not overlap Angry

That message is a dangerous one and should be challenged at every opportunity.

DGRossetti · 29/05/2019 17:50

If it reaches a jury, selection could be interesting ? Will jurors be quizzed on their political views, allegiances or how they voted (if at all) in the referendum ?

Unlikely, I guess. And if it does reach a jury, I would expect the judge to be shit hot at grandstanding ...

My view of lawyers chimes with Juvenal. Which I am sure Boris would appreciate ...

Basilpots · 29/05/2019 17:56

Pretty well clearly the worlds of politicians/lawyers didn’t cross in this case otherwise the stickers never would have been applied to the bus. Had they checked I’m sure some lawyer somewhere would have mentioned the pitfalls. Unless they thought lying doesn’t matter of course because they have been getting away with it for so long.Then why check. It’s only a referendum not legally binding or owt say what you like. Go the full unicorn.

Also they are more than a few lawyers who are MPs you would think one of those might have piped up.

Basilpots · 29/05/2019 17:58

DG JRM educated but not clever.

1tisILeClerc · 29/05/2019 17:58

{ Basilpots Wed 29-May-19 17:40:54

Tis he certainly will be.}
Especially as she* will have Shaggy and Scooby helping her.

  • With due respect to Ms Weyand I am being a bit rude.
Basilpots · 29/05/2019 18:03

Tis Velma rocks !!!

Won’t have a word said against her. Brains of the outfit.

Fox would struggle against Scrappy doo!

1tisILeClerc · 29/05/2019 18:05

There is not much that is more depressing than being told by your solicitor that solicitors can't be trusted. (As £300 an hour inc VAT).

1tisILeClerc · 29/05/2019 18:07

{Tis Velma rocks !!!}
I am absolutely with you, it was an unfair 'style' observation not her very capable work.

NoWordForFluffy · 29/05/2019 18:16

If it reaches a jury, selection could be interesting ? Will jurors be quizzed on their political views, allegiances or how they voted (if at all) in the referendum?

We had this discussion at work today. I can't imagine there'll be many people who can genuinely say that a) they've no idea who he is and b) have some form of opinion about him.

And, even if there are a load of people that aren't aware of him, the chances of them all being selected for jury duty at the same time is more than a touch remote!

1tisILeClerc · 29/05/2019 18:18

Is that going to be his defence?
Known worldwide for being an arse so won't get a fair trial?

thethethethethe · 29/05/2019 18:19

Lawyers advise on the level of risk. Clients often decide that the risk is worth taking.