even by Crispin's standards...

[SigourneyHoward]

Extremely vocal intervention by CB following a jury finding his fellow Conservative Wakefield MP guilty of sexual assault....

twitter.com/CrispinBlunt/status/1513603624164859918

Thats awful- Is there any more detail about why he thinks its acceptable?
i know he tends to think being gay is a card you can play to make anything acceptable. He's actually my mp so i may write to him.

I think it's all over for Blunt. I've seen four people resign from the APPG now, and now Imran Khan's former election agent has condemned Blunt too. Reading the thread of replies, it sounds like the local conservative association in Wakefield are extremely happy to be rid of Khan and that they're furious that Blunt would try to interfere.

I was Imran Ahmed Khan's Agent when he was elected in 2019.

I know him reasonably well.

For you, @CrispinBlunt, as a member of Parliament, which is a court in itself, to question the integrity of Southwark CC; the integrity and professional ability of Mr Justice Baker, 1/-

the integrity of the jury and that of the Crown prosecutor, is frankly a disgrace. Not for the first time you have brought yourself into disrepute as an MP.

Mr Khan is, regardless of this case, unfit to be an MP. Trust me on this. I know where the bodies are buried

twitter.com/TonyHomewood/status/1513640659265200129?t=l5Ocj6fKISsrySUAAIuZVw&s=19

“Mr Khan is, regardless of this case, unfit to be an MP. Trust me on this. I know where the bodies are buried”

If this was the case, why did the individual continue in their role as agent? Very frustrating/disappointing that despite their alleged concern they continued to work in a role supporting Khan’s election.

I dunno. I wasn't there. The impression I am developing from reading different reports is that Khan was parachuted into the constituency as a candidate in 2019, and the relationship between him and the local conservative association soured after the election. And then they were stuck with him. And sadly, so was the rest of the constituency.

I can't believe Khan can remain as an MP if he gets less than a year in custody.
I know there will be pressure to resign, but surely any sort of sexual or violent conviction whilst a sitting MP should be an automatic GTFO.

This needs no comment - I think the second picture says it for us all!

It’s possible Blunt thinks that because the physical assault was limited to Khan touching the 15 year old on the legs and feet (stroking him, is maybe more accurate), it’s ‘minor’, and that it’s homophobia because a straight man assaulting a girl in this way (getting her drunk, encouraging her to watch porn and then touching her as she slept) would be unlikely to have been convicted.

But that’s because we live in a sexist society that doesn’t protect women and girls.

Eh, Crispy?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61075923

This was also a news item a little earlier on the Radio 3 news and they usually only cover about 4-5 things.

All over Radio 4, main bulletin and discussion piece. Apparently it expected that CB will withdraw his statement later today.

Worth noting the back story about initial attempts to keep the trial secret, apparently to avoid reputational damage to a serving MP. According to the Mail it took the resources of a couple of newspapers to challenge this in the courts.

The importance of the right to free speech is something that has come up repeatedly through the whole sex and gender debate.

He seems to have deleted the original tweet? Not sure that's going to help him now, like.

When people “withdraw” statements is that not completely worthless? How do you unsay things?

After my initial confusion in regards to which Imran Khan he was talking about CB has shown everyone exactly who he is. It is just a very bizarre conclusion to have come to.

After my initial confusion in regards to which Imran Khan he was talking about

You're not the only one

On R4 now

I'm increasingly amazed that any politician does Twitter. They're all one surge of blood to the head away from this.

I do think there are two narratives about this case and I’m finding it confusing.

In one, Khan forced the boy to drink gin, dragged the boy upstairs, made him watch pornography and then touched him sexually (but not on his genitals).

In the other, Khan persuaded the boy to drink gin in his bedroom, where Khan had been allowed to sleep with two teenage boys (in a family of strangers!), and he talked to the boy about pornography, then touched him sexually (but not on his genitals).

So it’s possible Crispin Blunt thinks the story has been exaggerated in the media and that the latter series of events is ‘minor’.

I don’t think that, to be clear. A 34 year old man should be nowhere near touching a 15 year old’s feet and legs, or drinking with him, or talking about porn, and it’s assault when you touch someone without permission.

Isn't the phrase 'hiding in plain sight'?

He's said it now. He can't wind the clock back. Now we know what he really thinks. He's told us.

@tabbycatstripy

I do think there are two narratives about this case and I’m finding it confusing.

In one, Khan forced the boy to drink gin, dragged the boy upstairs, made him watch pornography and then touched him sexually (but not on his genitals).

In the other, Khan persuaded the boy to drink gin in his bedroom, where Khan had been allowed to sleep with two teenage boys (in a family of strangers!), and he talked to the boy about pornography, then touched him sexually (but not on his genitals).

So it’s possible Crispin Blunt thinks the story has been exaggerated in the media and that the latter series of events is ‘minor’.

I don’t think that, to be clear. A 34 year old man should be nowhere near touching a 15 year old’s feet and legs, or drinking with him, or talking about porn, and it’s assault when you touch someone without permission.

This man has a warped view of what is acceptable and not.

As a woman and a mother of a girl this us terrifying since he is such a strong advocate for TWAW and can so easily excuse any of our concerns.

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

I dunno. I wasn't there. The impression I am developing from reading different reports is that Khan was parachuted into the constituency as a candidate in 2019, and the relationship between him and the local conservative association soured after the election. And then they were stuck with him. And sadly, so was the rest of the constituency.

Yes, perhaps there wasn't much time to vet him? Wikipedia tells us that "he was selected after the withdrawal of a candidate whose racist and sexist social media posts were uncovered", and at the time of the withdrawal of that candidate, Mary Creagh commented, "Will the next candidate they parachute in be any better? Don’t hold your breath."

Still, if they only knew that IAK was dodgy after the election then the fact of having been his agent at the election seems almost irrelevant. Perhaps he had an ongoing role post-election?

Defending a convicted nonce is rarely a good look. I almost admire Blunt's bravery in standing up for his friend. (For comparison, think of how Glinner's old friends were too frightened to support him publicly because he'd committed the crime of standing up for women and girls.) Blunt's statement is surely career suicide.

‘This man has a warped view of what is acceptable and not.’

I’m finding a lot of people do. They hear criticism of people making sexual advances to children and their first thought is “homophobia”.

But actually this is doing the gay community no favours at all. People in general don’t mind that some people are gay. They mind when homosexuality is used as a liberal shield for the sexualisation and assault of children.

(Most gay people obviously don’t do this, but it’s harmful to the gay community that some do.)

Yes, perhaps there wasn't much time to vet him?

Khan's election agent from 2019 is on twitter, he said a phone call was made to the Conservative Party about these allegations just a couple of days before the election. At that time there was no conviction, nor police investigation.

Having said that all political parties are dreadful at vetting candidates for both general and local elections

So it’s possible Crispin Blunt thinks the story has been exaggerated in the media and that the latter series of events is ‘minor’.

It is not minor to grope a young boy in the safety of his own home and bed. I know that you are not the one saying it. But for Blunt to write as such is farking amazing.

Still not his place to impugn the judicial process in such a flagrant manner. He has jeopardised his own mate's appeal btw because this media blow up may bring out other victims - as the convicted MP seems to have had a habit of rapey behaviour to say the least. Khan also served in a developing country as UN staff - who knows what he did there?