Chris Huhne changes plea to guilty

[NicholasTeakozy]

BBC link here. I reckon that's the end of his political career then.

I do wonder if he'll give evidence. He'll have to, surely. Otherwise it's all "she said" and no "he said".

Lord Oakeshott's her cousin, I think.

I think it's eight women and four men. Women often aren't sympathetic to other women. I could imagine how it would be in her shoes, but maybe it needs more than that for an acquittal.

Xenia do you think more men think husbands are routinely capable of coercing their wives into illegal behaviour, or more women think women are routinely coerced into illegal behaviour by their husbands?

Has now said she didn't divorce him because the children would suffer.

He made her feel it would be her fault if they divorced and his political career suffered.

Bugger, have to do school run.

If anyone's on Twitter @ccdavies is at the trial.

I can just imagine someone like VP posting anonymously on the Relationship boards on here and being inundated with LTBs.

EG, simply that men tend to have a lot of sympathy with other men who commit adultery and sadly a good few men particularly of the judicial kind tend to favour the housewife model of marriage. Hopefully I am totally wrong and of course none of those factors ought to be remotely relevant.

I suppose if you had a sexist judge and jury they would ah yes all wives in thrall to their man and doing what he says. Who knows?

What about that black barrister who wrote that brilliant book about her upbringing Ugly? She has a role in this. I think VP called her. It was in the press.
order-order.com/2012/10/09/huhne-prosecution-witness-constance-briscoe-arrested/

limitedperiodonly, people who get lots of speeding points are CRAP DRIVERS. That means DANGEROUS DRIVERS.

taking the points for someone means keeping a dangerous driver on the road. That may mean that they cause an extra death or injury that would not have happened if they had been caught. If the parties concerned are sexual partners, that doesn't change anything.

anyone who can't drive at the appropriate speed, reacting to the signs should not be on the damn road at all.

The charitable view is that Mrs Huhne was dominated by her ex and could not get up the balls to leave him.

The whole thing is awful - washing your dirty linen in public on a grand scale.

Does she really want the whole world to know that her ex forced her to have an abortion?

And is she now going to call her children as witnesses to confirm that he put her name on the penalty form without telling her first? She must wish that she had never breathed a word to the journalist.

I do wonder if he'll give evidence. He'll have to, surely. Otherwise it's all "she said" and no "he said".

Well exactly, but why are the prosecution faffing around with Oakeshott who's a known acquaintance of Vicky's and is saying she was pressurised if they know Huhne will give a convincing account of "that conversation" ?

I do wonder if Huhne is coming under any pressure from his 5 children not to give evidence.
Ultimately, of course, it's a personal choice for him .

I wonder if handwriting analysis has been done on the form?

specialsubject I've held a clean licence for 23 years because I don't want the consequences of breaking the law and I suspect because I don't drive nearly as much as I used to.

If I did get nicked for speeding it wouldn't be anything like Huhne's infringement.

However, I do think that in some cases speed cameras are there to raise revenue rather than improve driving standards and in some places are there to catch out the unwary.

Bus lanes and red routes are the same too. I've always managed to notice those but having to avoid someone who suddenly veers into your lane because they've woken up isn't very safe.

It would be much better if we had traffic police officers to guide us and use their discretion. I've benefitted from that twice, which probably makes me a crap driver in your book, but I'll bow to their better judgement.

But of course, skilled traffic officers cost money and don't make any.

Anyway, I don't want to hijack the thread.

just discovered that he already had nine points at the time of the alleged points transfer. The environment secretary was repeatedly SPEEDING?

the bloke is unbelievable.

So it looks like Huhne isn't giving evidence.

Vicky Pryce has started giving evidence, so the prosecution has ended and it's all defence witnesses hereon in.

So ..... why didn't he give evidence ?
It's very much in his interest to demonstrate clearly that he did not coerce Vicky.
Will clearly affect his culpability, basis of plea, plausibility of mitigation and ultimately sentence.

I know hackmum. It's cringeworthy.

cumfy I'm no expert but those calls aren't making it look like Huhne coerced her, no matter what we might think of him. It's damaging, hearing her berating him and then talking to Oakeshott about her performance. And I do feel some sympathy with her desire for revenge.

If the prosecution want Huhne, then surely he'd have no choice. And I guess he might welcome the opportunity to say Vicky is lying. They hate each other.

I'm torn between feeling guilty about intruding on private grief (not that much) and wanting to hear more.

I'd doubt if the prosecution would see the value-added in recruiting a very recently-established 'known liar' to support their case, I'd have thought.

'The environment secretary was repeatedly SPEEDING?'

Incredible! Was he not cognisant of his carbon footprint?

But he was not the Environment Secretary at that time. He was not yet an MP. He was an MEP.

He was a Lib Dem MEP at the time, when the Lib Dem manifesto was based around some big issues including the 3 'E's: Environment, Europe and Education, IIRC.

One of the recorded calls I heard today sounded very much as if he was bullying her - I know she was trying to get him to admit it on tape, but he kept talking over her, contradicting her & telling her what she should do

She says he had already sent back the initial form, naming her as the driver, before she was presented with the 2nd form with her details. But I suppose there's no way of proving that one way or the other...

It's a nasty situation all round & I feel very sorry for their kids

But surely he isn't compellable, as they are still married. So the prosecution can't force him to give evidence.

If the prosecution want Huhne, then surely he'd have no choice. And I guess he might welcome the opportunity to say Vicky is lying.

Witnesses aren't compellable so far as I know, limited.

But it will very adversely affect him because he cannot now credibly say at sentencing he did not at the very least put pressure on her.

I smell some sort of deal:
He doesn't give evidence against her and the DC don't give evidence against him.

Aren't they cumfy? I thought they were. I thought that's why we read those terrible texts from Peter Huhne and listened to those phone calls arranged by Isobel Oakeshott. What was she doing in court for the prosecution today? Do you think she wanted to be there?

Without compulsion lots of criminal trials wouldn't get off the ground. But maybe the criminal justice system is optional. I don't know, do you?

As I said before, at the risk of seeming naive I don't think any judge, barrister or solicitor would risk their career and liberty making a deal over some driving case cooked up by stupid people.

The majority of witnesses are compellable. One of the exceptions is a married spouse.