Vicky Pryce is guilty

[UnexpectedItemInShaggingArea]

This whole affair has been the very definition of a Pyrric victory

'I did it. I'm not proud of myself but I was under a lot of pressure' then Huhne would be ruined and she'd get a suspended sentence and a lot of sympathy.

True, and I also think a suspended sentence would have been on the cards if she'd pleaded guilty at the doors of the court.

I do wonder about the nature of the legal advice she received and whether it was made clear she was taking a jail/no jail decision.

A lot of public and privately funded lawyers have got very rich off the splashes from this particular teacup.

"This whole affair has been the very definition of a Pyrric victory"

Just looked that up and completely agree.

she deserves to go to jail as well as he does. hes a vile character as are most MPs however from some of the evidence that came out she showed she was out for revenge no matter what and she didnt care who she used to try and get one over on him.

hackmum, that's really interesting about pre-trial discussions, do you have a link ?

Read the emails between VP and the Sunday Times. She clearly states she wants to "nail" her husband, ruin his career (understandably in the circs, but IRRELEVANT to the verdict) and discusses how she ideally wants to do it without getting into trouble herself, the ST assure her (totally disingenuously) that if she plays the wronged woman card she'll be OK. She was incredibly foolish.

I think when someone has betrayed you and walked all over your emotions it can send you a bit mad! I feel for her you don't think straight.

I think there is too much confusion between her actions once he left her and what happened at the time of the offence. I don't see how it was legitimate to use any of the contemporary material as evidence - surely the only thing relevant was whether at the time she felt coerced by her husband to take the points. I believe she did feel coerced - I also think she was quite wrong to go down the revenge route - though the provocation was pretty extreme too IMO. Two different points in time and different issues.

I think VP was pressured, but not coerced. There is a world of difference between the two. As I understand it, to make out the defence you've effectively got to show the spouse stood over you and made you do it. That wasn't this case.

Her own evidence showed that: yes I stood up to him over the second abortion, but no I couldn't years later with a v good job, older children and more independence when he demanded I take his speeding points. Not credible.

And let us not forget she didn't dob CH in to the cops, she took her story to the media. The original version had an entirely blameless young Lib Dem activist taking the points for CH. That story fell apart because the journos established the young woman didn't even have a licence at the time. But if she had, she could have been investigated and caused all kinds of problems, just so VP could have her revenge. That is an absolutely appalling act of casual dishonesty that has been overlooked.

Along with being prepared to disclose to her son that his father wanted him to be aborted, it is hard to feel anything other than distaste for VP. However bad you think she is, though, Chris Huhne is a thousand times worse. Let the costs order be swingeing.

Hackmum thanks for the update on the burden of proof. I was very interested in that on the other thread, whether she would have to prove her defence.

And even with a lower burden for her, she got found guilty.

I thought that coerced suggested 'under duress' or threat of violence? I agree that it sounds like this was not the case.

It certainly is out of order to use children against each other though. I wonder what else will come out that donnie alluded to earlier upthread.

I disagree. I think children have a right to know things like if their father is an adulterer or wife beater or bully or liar or wanted to abort them. I don't think you do the child any favours at all by lying to it.

If CH did not want to be villified by his children he could easily (a) not speeded (I never speed) (b) not lied on the form about who are driving (c) not gone ahead and registered his wife as the driver without her consent and then say sign here or ruin my career(d) not committed adultery with the lesbian in the civil partnership.

I am sure the children know exactly who is responsible for what in this sorry saga.

I wonder if it would be an idea to change the speeding forms sent out ?

We've noticed (having both been caught by speeding cameras on same stretch of road BTW) that the form has to be filled in by the person owning the car.
Maybe if there was a small section that had to be filled in by the driver briefly explaining nature and purpose of journey it might cut down on the dishonesty which seems to me more likely when a simple signature is requested ?

Just a thought. But maybe it would be too much of an invasion of privacy to ask people to say where they were going and why ?
But it did seem odd to me when I was the one driving that DH had to fill in the form as car happens to be registered in his name.
(As I mentioned a year later the same thing happened to him)

Why does it matter that the woman he cheated with was a lesbian? Adultery is adultery - her sexuality not relevant.

I agree that they should know about his criminal activity but telling a child their father wanted to abort them is just cruel and not fair to the child. A lot of people consider an abortion, decide to have the child anyway and never ever look back afterwards. I am certainly not sticking up for him - I think he is awful but it's manipulative and nasty to say that to a child imo.

It isn't wrong per se to want to end or consider ending an unplanned pregnancy. It certainly is wrong to pressure the mother into ending a pregnancy.

As we know from threads on here some couples have very difficult times deciding what to do for lots of cogent reasons. We only have one person's version of what was said and why over ending the pregnancies, or even that it happened at all. Much as I loathe the Huhne person, I would be slow to decide he had definitely tried to force VP to abort. He may have done, he may not. I bear in mind her limited credibility (given the initial invented claim that an activist took the points).

I don't think such honesty to children who are nearly 20 is wrong at all. Far too many adulterous men think their wives should not even mention they strayed so then the child is very very puzzled and thinks the child is to blame when instead it was the father's fault (and of course sometimes the other way round). We are not talking about 5 year old children here.

Also I suspect the Huhne children know only too well what their father is like and hardly needed the court to make it clear. Mr Huhne is the real loser in all this caused entirely by his conduct.

It would be a surprising thing to make up for a court. It seems pretty likely to me that he may have suggested it.

Yes, it was irrelevant his adultery was with a bisexual in a civil partnership although the fact she was with someone else is particularly nasty too as two relationships were broken up, not just the Huhne marriage and the lover (who is in PR and then tried to get an injunction to protect her own privacy when she often sold stories to the press - she failed obviously) did brief the press pretty nastily about Vicky P in 2010.

Worth a read if bored www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/judgments/2012/trimingham-v-assoc-news-ltd-judgment

She'll never get on the MPC now, or have her own political career, but she'll get over this. She'll always be a top economist - her career is far from over. Even if she does serve a custodial sentence I imagine she'll use the time to outline a book or two on the Eurozone crisis.

There's plenty of work in economic crisis punditry - and will be for some time!

I agree with Xenia (a first!). Her children are adults, you can't protect them forever. After what Huhne did to the family with such arrogance and callous disregard, I doubt anything would surprise them about his behaviour.

Carina Trimingham may well deserve Chris Huhne.

They both committed a crime and must face the consequences. The pair of them should hang their heads in shame for airing their dirty laundry in public - the damage that they have done to their family is probably irreparable. I'm sure they will have plenty of time to consider the harm and hurt they have caused - and all the wasted time and money of the court process.

It's not just a matter of telling the children though (although I would not myself) it's the fact that the course of action she chose meant telling EVERYONE. I would think my mother an utter fuckwit if she did such a thing. For me it would definitely be worse than one parent cheating on the other (which happens quite a lot). Their poor kid has had his private text messages to his dad splashed all over the press. OK, Huhne sparked the whole thing off with his points dodging but all of that personal stuff would never have come out if Pryce hadn't decided to blab to the papers. Such a major error. I hope the whole family can get over it.

Xenia, I have the judgement you linked before - it is very enlightening.

I have never heard the phrase pyrric victory before - somehow it makes me think of every time Ireland win the Eurovision song contest, it means they have to shell out hosting it the next year.

A couple of posters have said that VP's family responsibilities will be a mitigating factor for sentencing. Why would that be? Their children are adults now, so not dependent on her, surely? (That's not to minimise the damage that this case will have done to them, BTW.)

Another poster said they thought she shouldn't be imprisoned because she's not a danger to society. True. However, to my mind that's only one of the purposes of sending people to prison. There are at least 4 that I can think of.

1. Punishment
2. Deterrent to others
3. Rehabilitation/education
4. Segregation from society

VP would fall within 1 and 2, I would have thought.

It's not just a question of the children being at an age to understand what their father is like. It's that they have been used as human shields to try to protect Pryce from the mess she created so that any detail of their private life, even pre-birth fgs, becomes fair game for the media to feed on.

Definitely 1 and 2 - expect a hefty vindictive sentence to make an example of both of them.