Governed by Consent.
In 1931, there were just 168,000 Britons living in India (including 60,000 in the army and police and 4,000 in civil government) – to run a country approaching 300 million people. In earlier times, a mere 31,000 stalwart Britons had achieved the same impossible task. A task made possible purely by the agreement of the Indians to accept being so governed.
The Raj, in Eric Hobsbawm’s evocative words, was ‘so easily won, so narrowly based, so absurdly easily ruled, thanks to the devotion of a few and the passivity of the many’.
In 1919, Mohandas Gandhi reached down and scooped up a handful of mud at a beach and declared that he was shaking the foundations of the British Empire. He boiled the mud in seawater to produce illegal salt, an act repeated by thousands which led to the arrest of an estimated 60,000-100,000 men and women who participated for the first time in mass public demonstrations. Widespread civil disobedience followed with ordinary people across the Indian continent burning British cloth, picketing shops selling foreign cloth, picketing alcohol shops, and withholding their rent.
The British Raj collapsed.
Britain is ruled by consent too. 650 MPs legislating our behaviour; 126,818 police officers carrying out their wishes – a task only made possible by the tacit agreement of 61 million of us to be so ruled.
Looking through the Sunday papers today, I find myself constantly gasping at just what we do consent to. Cravenly, culpably, reproachably, and in some cases, opportunistically, consent to.
In the Mail on Sunday, we have David Rose interviewing Bhadresh Gohil. Mr Gohil, an innocent solicitor, was convicted of money-laundering and jailed for ten years.
An appalling tale that I first wrote of back in January; of a Metropolitan police unit set up to investigate financial corruption which was itself corrupted by ex-Met officers working for a private investigation firm, RISC Management. That corruption was exacerbated by the failure to disclose a secret dossier showing the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice should never have been brought.
‘We have come across the clearest evidence that prosecuting counsel, Sasha Wass QC and Esther Schutzer-Weissmann, along with lawyers from the CPS and a number of officers from the DPS all prosecuted my client knowing he was innocent.’ The evidence, he went on, showed that ‘prosecuting counsel lied to this court’ in pre-trial hearings, and to the Court of Appeal.
In a sensational volte face, a CPS spokesman yesterday admitted it is now clear that, contrary to repeated statements by Crown lawyers in court and in legal documents, there is ‘material to support the assertion that a police officer received payment in return for information’.
Mr Gohil has now been paid £20,000 in an out-of-court settlement by the CPS for the three weeks he spent remanded in custody at the end of last year facing trial.
The CPS of course, have paid nothing of the sort. We have paid, the British taxpayers. We have paid Mr Gohil £20,000 compensation for his ordeal at the hands of corrupt prosecutors. That is our ‘silent consent’.
The Sunday Times tells us of Michael Isherwood, who was accused by a 16-year-old girl of secretly filming her on his phone. Eventually the police returned his mobile phone and computer, apologising for the delay in accessing the material on his phone which showed nothing more than innocent images of Michael playing golf, claiming that the delay was because they had difficulty in evading the security on his phone. They hadn’t been able to ask Michael for help in unlocking the phone because – Michael had committed suicide 5 weeks after his arrest, convinced that his life was ruined by the publicity surrounding the allegation and arrest.
We consent to that tragedy. It was done in our name, paid for by us.
David Bryant, 66, a former firefighter from Christchurch, Dorset, was freed by the Appeal Court in July following almost three years in jail for a crime he did not commit. It had emerged that his accuser was a fantasist and serial liar, something the police had failed to establish in their headlong dash for evidence for another conviction – but which Mr Bryant’s wife was able to discover without any of the avenues open to a police investigation. Whether Mr Bryant receives compensation for his imprisonment remains to be seen at present, but if he does:
We will be paying it, out of our taxed income. Not the police officers who failed to investigate properly, nor the CPS who blindly went ahead with the prosecution. However incompetent they are – we pay for them too.
Geoff Long spent five years in prison, partly on evidence such as ‘the pink sink in the bedroom where he had washed himself after abusing her’. The police evidence failed to mention that they had even ripped up the floorboards in that room and discovered that there had never been a sink or any other form of plumbing in the bedroom, no pink, sky blue pink, or even fuschia sink. It took a trial, two attempts at a retrial, and £100,000 worth of solicitors bills before ‘the CPS decided not to offer any further evidence’ – as they so euphemistically put discovering that their one and only prosecution witness is talking utter bunkum.
We pay their wages whilst they are doing this – they do it on our behalf. We silently consent to their treatment of Geoff Long.
Have I finished? Nope. The Guardian tells us that we must fork out £100,000 to Conrad Jones of Nottingham. Let us say that given Mr Jones reputation and background, it was not surprising that he should have come to the attention of the judiciary. However, he was innocent of the charge of ‘intimidating a witness’ to a murder. He was sent to prison for six years. All the while the CPS held evidence showing that he couldn’t possibly have been guilty as charged because they had video footage of surveillance by another police unit who suspected him of a completely different crime!
Sasha Barton, Jones’s solicitor, said: “To discover years after the event that the CPS, on the advice of highly experienced lawyers, has knowingly and repeatedly failed to comply with the criminal law on disclosure is shocking, and raises very serious questions which go right to the heart of public confidence in the criminal justice system and the legal profession.”
Last year, a black firefighter, Edric Kennedy-Macfoy, was tasered by Police. Mr Kennedy-Macfoy claimed he had been assaulted and racially abused. The Metropolitan Police apologised and paid him compensation.
They didn’t pay him anything; we did. They handed him some of our tax money.
Now the police officers involved who were due to face misconduct allegations have made a formal complaint alleging the IPCC deliberately withheld evidence and that criminal offences may have been committed.
We will be paying for the legal representation at the ensuing hearing. We will be paying for any compensation due to any officers who have been unfairly maligned.
Not the Met Police; not the IPCC; just the taxpayers.
A draft report by Sir Richard Henriques, the retired High Court judge, was submitted to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, the Met Police commissioner, on Friday concerning the £2 million pound Operation Midland investigation which the Met Police chose to carry out.
We paid for that report; £66,000. We paid for Operation Midland. We will be paying Hogan-Howe’s pension.
We won’t be allowed to see the report.
Our only function is to silently consent to all this, and uncomplainingly pay up.
Just like the inhabitants of the Indian continent, so long ago.
Pass the salt.
- Bandini
October 9, 2016 at 12:56 pm -
Surprised to see no mention of Katrina Percy:
“Critics last night attacked the trust for offering “a completely unjustifiable reward [£190,000] for failure”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/07/scandal-nhs-chief-steps-down-from-sideways-move-after-public-pro/- Ho Hum
October 9, 2016 at 6:56 pm -
You might just find that you’re paying the price of keeping the pollies bottoms out of the fire, as the decision to make her go might well really have been theirs, but not genuinely be justifiable by anything she has actually done, as opposed to what the media might try to make you believe she has. Do you think that if there had been something that they could have really really got her for, she wouldn’t have been told to go a long long time ago, and that her bottom would have even touched the chair on the day that happened?
And think of the balls-up with the shoesmith. The taxpayer ended up paying for that one, not those who reacted to satisfy the media’s court of public opinion wish for a public execution, and brought about a what was proven to be an injustice. And I can think on a few more that I am aware of, that you might well not be
And we here all know about, and disapprove of, media induced injustices, don’t we?
We really do, don’t we, or do we just want to pick and choose which ones we like, and which we don’t?
- Bandini
October 9, 2016 at 11:38 pm -
The fightback starts here: “‘Finger unfairly pointed at the porcelain-skinned Percy’, claims Ho Hum.”
- Ho Hum
October 10, 2016 at 12:01 am -
No doubt bylined to: Porky Teller, Our Star Reporter, Yesterday, Today and Forever
- Ho Hum
- JuliaM
October 10, 2016 at 7:15 am -
What IS your obsession with incompetent women in positions of power, Ho Hum? Shoesmith, Percy…
Is it a boarding school type of thing?
- Mr Ecks
October 10, 2016 at 10:37 am -
A question for a lawyer Anna.
How is it that defence lawyers aren’t shredding this kind of crap in court?
Tearing up the floor looking for a pink sink?
How could any sort of “defence” fail to leave the CPS in that case lying dead on the court room floor?
I notice the nasty name of Wass in the above accounts. She was brought in to fix Rolf’s wagon and used legal theatre to good effect to ensure that a complete lack of fact does not mean no cigar for the persecutors. There must however, in the name of sanity, be a point beyond which theatrics can no longer beat out fact and logic.
- Mr Ecks
- Bandini
- Ho Hum
- David
October 9, 2016 at 12:58 pm -
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy”. 25 Feb 2016 – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/12173315/Public-may-never-know-full-background-to-Operation-Midland-hints-Met-Deputy-Commissioner.html
- Bandini
October 9, 2016 at 1:15 pm -
Not hard to see why we won’t be allowed to see all the embarrassing details, David, when the bloke who’s scampering away (no doubt to some lucrative role ‘advising’ or ‘consulting’ – just like Percy did!) was able to decide the terms of the ‘investigation’ into his own shameful ineptitude & also to limit our access to reading about what an utter bozo he was.
You’ll continue your daydreaming as surely as MI6 will continually fail to ‘take you out’… but given that you’ve now cemented your reputation as someone determinedly poisoning the truth by spreading lies & bunkum – and that it all relates to your queer obsession with sex/torture/murder involving young boys – it’s a wonder no would-be Montalbano has thought to cast his magnifying-glass over yourself.
- David
October 9, 2016 at 1:22 pm -
Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe is, I think, the best Police Commissioner that London has ever had.
- Bandini
October 9, 2016 at 1:26 pm -
Yes, you’ve copied & pasted this comment over and over already, David. The first 37 times I read it I remained unconvinced, but it’s starting to work its magic now.
- tdf
October 9, 2016 at 4:39 pm -
Is he? The others must have been really bad, if so!
- JuliaM
October 10, 2016 at 7:20 am -
Wait until Cressida Dick succeeds him..!
- The Blocked Dwarf
October 10, 2016 at 8:57 am -
Cressida Dick
Antibiotics can help, I’m told. Next time wear a condom.
- Mudplugger
October 10, 2016 at 10:49 am -
At least we won’t have a problem deporting any Brazilian electricians then….
- The Blocked Dwarf
- JuliaM
- Bandini
- David
- Bandini
- Fred Karno
October 9, 2016 at 2:08 pm -
You might also mention Mark Pearson – http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/02/08/mark-pearson-cleared-sexually-assaulting-actress-waterloo-station_n_9185748.html
CCTV showed he committed no offence so the CPS adulterated the CCTV recording to better make their non-existent case.
- Bandini
October 9, 2016 at 6:46 pm -
I’d almost forgotten about this one. Every news article seems to give the last word to the CPS:
“A CPS spokesman said: “There was sufficient evidence for this case to proceed to court and progress to trial. We respect the decision of the jury.””
I’d rather give it to Mark Pearson:
“I feel I have undergone a form of mental torture sanctioned by the state.”
- Keith Walters
October 10, 2016 at 3:41 am -
Ahrrr yes, well the CPS and the Judiciary generally have adopted a radically new system of mathematics that makes Indiana’s 19th century attempt to deem the value to Pi to be 4 seem like kid stuff:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill.Just as raising the value of Pi from (Crudely rounded to 100 decimal places) 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209749445923078 164062862089986280348253421170679
to exactly 4 would revolutionize 19th century commerce by speeding up all those tiresome calculations involving round things,
the CPS’s “New Math” uniquely assigns a flexible value to the number zero to greatly expedite the tiresome judicial process.
So, “Insufficient Evidence” can include: “No bloody evidence whatsoever”, but equally
“Sufficient Evidence” can also include: “No Bloody Evidence Whatsoever”
Similarly “Not in the public interest” can include “No bloody evidence whatsoever”, or alternatively: “A shiteload of evidence that we’d rather the public weren’t interested in…”
The variable: “In the Public Interest” meanwhile is particularly valuable, as it can be assigned any value you like: “SFA”, “Not Much”, “Overwhelming”, without in any way impeding the legal process.
- Keith Walters
- Bandini
- cameron mcarthur
October 9, 2016 at 2:33 pm -
A consolation ; we can laugh, get drunk , vote Trump and hope for a spanner in the works.
- Hadleigh Fan
October 9, 2016 at 3:54 pm -
Several points occur to me on reading this, and the first is that in 1947 Indians got their way, and decided not to be ruled by whatever figure of Brits were camped in their peninsula. Now remind me, how may people from the sub-continent have come here? Why is it now racist to say to most of them: “Go Home, we don’t want you”?
Secondly, Anna, you are dead right: ‘compensation’ is paid out of taxes. So, compensation for criminality or negligence should come from the individuals’ pockets. If they are smart, they will have insurance, and surely this is a sensible function for their Union or whatever. I am with you, it is a further crime that the taxpayer picks up the bill. You could say the same of the NHS, and in my view, if they don’t want to take the time and effort to ask Johnny Foreigner to cough up, then let them pay for their own charity themselves.
You might also note that policemen in fast cars chasing car thieves kill people about as often as car thieves do, but seem to be immune from blame. I wonder why that is?
- David
October 9, 2016 at 4:39 pm -
@Hadleigh Fan Why should someone pay if it is not their fault, or they are just doing their job?
Especially if they want to share, and do their job, but are overruled by National Security?- Ho Hum
October 9, 2016 at 7:01 pm -
David, as you seem to be perpetually worried that the Security Services might well have it in for you, could you please do us all a favour and take out an insurance which, if that really came to fruition, would save us taxpayers money by covering the cost?
You’d get it cheap, but then it probably wouldn’t need to pay out too much anyway
- Ho Hum
- dearieme
October 9, 2016 at 9:36 pm -
In 1947 those Indians who survived the slaughters got their way.
- Peter Raite
October 11, 2016 at 2:24 am -
You could say the same of the NHS, and in my view, if they don’t want to take the time and effort to ask Johnny Foreigner to cough up, then let them pay for their own charity themselves.
Last I heard, the profit the NHS makes from charging non-residents who do pay outweighs the loss incurred from those who don’t.
- David
- Ho Hum
October 9, 2016 at 7:11 pm -
Trying to be a bit more serious, Anna, if any of us pulled a stunt like lying to a court, we’d be done for something, possibly perjury, or maybe perverting the course of justice.
Do barristers and lawyers who appear in court have any form of immunity against such?
If not, why doesn’t anyone make a formal complaint? We’ve seen in blogs past that the police have acted on accusations made not by those affected but by others trying to influence matters in the prosecution’s favour. So if those sorts of stories are properly justifiable, why do very few people, just the generally outraged, or seemingly even those directly involved, not do that?
I’m just curious, in the pursuit of even-handedness
- Jonathan King
October 9, 2016 at 8:38 pm -
Brilliant; one of your best. Not losing any of your sharpness, are you dear? When oh when is someone in charge going to rumble this? Sadly probably not the former Home Secretary, nominally in charge of this bunch of crooks.
- dearieme
October 9, 2016 at 9:38 pm -
I suppose there’s a deal. The police won’t investigate crooked lawyers if the lawyers don’t prosecute the police.
- dearieme
October 9, 2016 at 9:39 pm -
Maybe “deal” is too strong. Maybe “unspoken understanding”? Who knows?
- Mudplugger
October 10, 2016 at 8:28 am -
Maybe the ‘unspoken understanding’ is accompanied by an odd handshake or two….
- Mudplugger
- dearieme
- JimS
October 9, 2016 at 10:16 pm -
Directors of companies tell us that they deserve big salaries because they have ‘responsibility’ but when things go wrong it is usually the ‘company’ i.e. shareholders/customers, that pay.
Rather than putting big fines on companies for, say, breaches of safety, wouldn’t it be better to fine, (on a smaller scale), the directors on the board, (corporate responsibility)?
- Ho Hum
October 9, 2016 at 10:22 pm -
Start with Ministers and MPs first. They know how to really cock things up to our cost, with no personal liability themselves
- English Pensioner
October 10, 2016 at 10:23 am -
When the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time made a huge loss by getting the country’s money involved in the South Sea Bubble, he was thrown into the Tower! We really should bring this option back!
- English Pensioner
- Mr Wray
October 10, 2016 at 2:11 pm -
Why not go across the board and fine everyone involved with the firm from CEO to cleaner? After all they were all accomplices in the ‘crime’.
I have always thought the man who dumps the rubbish by the side of the road is just as guilty as the man who pressures him to do it …
- Ho Hum
- Ho Hum
October 9, 2016 at 10:19 pm -
One feels that sometimes there are those who might wish to even govern our consent
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37590004
I can’t wait for their treatise on how to approach The Great POTUS Pretender
- binao
October 9, 2016 at 10:29 pm -
Two things, the first being the +126 thousand police (and of course PCSOs and back office civilians). About one for every 550 of us – my largish Downs village of 7000 therefore provides about 12 of them but doesn’t even have a PCSO any more, they and police are all based miles away like very expensive emergency plumbers waiting for the call after the boiler’s bust. Similarly about 1.5 million nhs staff is about one for every fifty of us.
How can it be? Average occupancy here 2.3 per dwelling; a cleaner, a nurse or doctor for every 22 homes? Conversely, an nhs employee every 22 homes. A policeman every 240 homes?
Where are they all? Or has my O-level maths failed me again?
Second, re the taxpayer coughing up for failures and unlawful behaviour; perhaps the insurance of the public against public service employees’ misbehaviour should be on an individual basis. OK the cost of the indemnity would be for the employer, but by relating the cover to the individual, the cock up merchants would become uninsurable and therefore unemployable. At least the merry-go-round of failed officials might be stopped.- Ho Hum
October 10, 2016 at 12:10 am -
I think that you will find that in places where there is a clearer link between claims for incorrect treatment and the one treating the patient, studies show that the incidence of claims bears more relationship to the patient’s perception of the one treating them, than to their actual competence. In simple terms, good doctors, with bad bedside manners, get more claims made against them than would be merited from their professional performance.
But if the option were offered to you by some wally polly, and you wanted to throw out the better for the worse on the basis of political opportunism and incorrect assumptions, by all means vote for it. It’s your democratic right….
- Ho Hum
- Stewart Cowan
October 10, 2016 at 12:02 am -
Excellent! It makes one wonder what proportion of inmates are actually guilty of their alleged crimes. I don’t think that people in ‘authority’ are generally much interested in justice or duty of care or honesty; a few will be decent people, but the key word is ‘authority’ and I have noticed that people find it hard to deal with their responsibilities (i.e. ‘power’, to them) rationally and humanely. Give someone a hi-viz vest and he’ll feel important; give him an office with his name on the door and he’ll think he’s a deity. Why should he obey the same laws and observe the same standards as normal folk? He’s got his own office, don’t you know?
I think that people wrongly incarcerated should be compensated financially, but take it from the crooked cops, CPS, etc. I’m sure their pension pots could be put to good use before their expected time. The money could also be used to pay for them doing time for their corruption.
Something else I have found out over the years dealing with politicians is that a) they have no real power and b) if they did, they wouldn’t want us to have access to it anyway. They serve themselves first, their parties second and the people, not much at all. There are exceptions, but I’m struggling to think of one right now. You can see them for what they are from their voting record – they represent their parties. That’s when they bother to turn up, of course.
I think we are also seeing that one bad apple really has turned the barrel rotten. Self-interest (and the lying and scheming which go with it) seems to be the norm and the decent cops, ‘charity’ workers, council ‘officers’, etc. have had to change jobs because they would rather take a menial job and retain their integrity.
- Ho Hum
October 10, 2016 at 12:24 am -
As far as your observations on police pensions go, I’m not too sure that you fully understand how the money flows work?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11446830
Sure, you might retire a few of them on no pension, but one way or another it’s still the taxpayer who would pay at the time any liability was created and met, regardless of whether that is lessened by the offsetting reduction in pension payments, and assuming, of course, that you could actually prove that there was malice intended. Not that the police have to be too fussy themselves with proving that nowadays, I grant, given the relatively non onerous laws relating to confiscation of people’s assets
- Stewart Cowan
October 10, 2016 at 3:34 am -
It is all taxpayers’ money, but the pension is, in effect, part of the copper’s salary, so he has worked for it (we assume).
Yes, proving culpability and negligence is another thing, but in some of the cases Anna listed, it seems clear.
I understand that doctors have a system whereby they are covered for any claims and don’t have to pay if they are found to have been negligent..
It’s all a stitch-up (no pun intended).
- Hadleigh Fan
October 10, 2016 at 10:51 am -
If the pension is part of a policeman’s pay, then it can be forfeited if it is obtained falsely.
Why should a policeman’s pay be not be sequestered, and yet MY pay is sequestered to pay through taxation for their malfeasance (or whatever the damn word is).
- Hadleigh Fan
- Stewart Cowan
- Tommy K
October 10, 2016 at 11:37 am -
I am sure quite a high proportion of prisoners have been wrongly convicted. We know from a number of high profile miscarriages of justice that securing a conviction is a higher priority for a lot of authoritarians than convicting the right person for the right crime. Given how difficult it is to get a case reviewed, the high profile cases that have been overturned only after well funded and supported campaigns must be only the tip of an iceberg.
- Ho Hum
- The Blocked Dwarf
October 10, 2016 at 12:25 am -
This afternoon we went over to see Granddaughter2 ( 6 or 7 , don’t ask me difficult questions, I remember her name-what more do you want?!). She has been in bed with cold and was still in her PJs when we arrived.Among the little presents we took with us was a balloon from her Aunt in Germany…no I don’t know why my German Sister-in-Law thought her great niece might like a balloon left over from the last company ‘bash’, a balloon with the firm’s name across it but her great niece was enthralled …after her ever loving ‘Opi’ (Me) had given himself an aneurysm inflating the bloody thing for her.
She has a room full of sparkly, beeping, over priced Trademarked plastic crap and a DVD collection that would rival a video shop of our youths. But she played with that balloon more than she played with the last £40 bit of plastic flim-tie-in we took her last time.
She was ‘headering’ it, playing ‘tennis’ with it and generally having a whale of a time.
Sooo Opi decided it would be a nice gesture to video the fun inorder to send German Aunty photographic evidence that her gift had ticked all a 6 year old’s boxes. Lit the boiler on my steam powered smart phone and when it had reached frying speed, filmed Granddaughter 2 prancing around with her ‘Fertilizern R Uns’ inscribed balloon.Then suddenly my Aged Mother , who’d come along for the sick bed visit of her Great Granddaughter, said “Pull your pyjama bottoms up dear”….and my blood ran cold.
I hadn’t realised I had been filming her, Granddaughter, with her “builders crack” on display.
Tomorrow I will go through the video with editing software and remove the offending Gluteus Maximus.Ask Mr Isherwood if I am over reacting..if you have a medium handy.
That’s what I take from today’s post from the Landlady. Yes the waste and expense angers me but that doesn’t compare with the fear that roll call of ‘everyday Joes’ who could so easily have been me or thee. I feel sorry for the JK’s, the ‘can you guess what it is yet’s and H.Webb esquires of this world but when all said and done they had the means to at least employ good briefs, work the media and fight back. Me & Joe Bloggs should be so lucky.
- The Blocked Dwarf
October 10, 2016 at 12:33 am -
Bob (or the Landlady), I’ll take a comma and an ‘induces’ after the ‘thee’, please.
- Hadleigh Fan
October 10, 2016 at 10:53 am -
Let’s hope her face, wrists or head hair weren’t exposed, or you’ll get a call from the Imam!
- The Blocked Dwarf
October 10, 2016 at 11:11 am -
Actually her hair is covered most of the time now.
She may not bring home much in the way of homework from school but colds and head lice are in abundance.
Oh that nit shampoo…once smelt…never forgotten. Their poor kitten still isn’t right in the head due to the fumes…
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Mr Wray
October 10, 2016 at 2:20 pm -
The fear is part of why they are doing this. They want you to be afraid. Frightened people tend to do as they are told …
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Tommy K
October 10, 2016 at 11:16 am -
The figures tell an interesting story. We have more police officers ensuring the citizens of the UK toe the line than we have soldiers protecting us from world wide threats. 127,000 cops in the UK – twice the number of soldiers and police combined in colonial India. And that’s before adding in the PCSOs, the CPS, all the backroom staff, the tame magistrates, judges and their court staff, prison officers, and the endless numbers of quangos, planners, bailiffs and council enforcement officers. There are simply far too many people with a vested interest – financial or feeding their own self-righteousness and self-importance – in exerting authority over others. Meanwhile, we sit back and let them make the rules and take our money without protest. I suppose we deserve what we get.
- Mr Wray
October 10, 2016 at 2:24 pm -
Quite. The bigger the State the more people are dependant upon it and the bigger the State can become.
The ONS reckons that 5.4 million people worked for the State in 2014. Try telling all those voters that they will lose their jobs at the next election.
- Mr Wray
- Stewart Cowan
October 10, 2016 at 11:31 am -
The CPS at their ‘best’. Someone who dared to challenge the consent and was put in her place.
- jacquesketch@gmail.com
October 11, 2016 at 12:05 pm -
That is shocking. Just signed it..for all the good it will do.
Would i be right in assuming that the women wanting to abort female babies were of *cough* no particular race *cough* ?
- Grandpa1940
October 15, 2016 at 1:11 pm -
“the women wanting to abort female babies were of *cough* no particular race *cough* ?”
Perhaps you might partially amend your query to read *coughing* no particular religion *coughing*? A touch more realistic, in todays ‘modern, forward-looking, multi-culti’ world?
- Grandpa1940
- jacquesketch@gmail.com
- Ho Hum
October 10, 2016 at 12:45 pm -
I appreciate that there are laws which do deal with some specific issues, and there is the argument that, aside from anything going to a magistrates court, ultimately the test of their application may rest with a jury, but does anyone here remember when they gave their consent to it being these people who should have the right, or any say in, determining, or even interpreting, what may be, and what may not be, socially acceptable behaviour?
http://news.sky.com/story/trolls-could-face-jail-under-new-legal-guidelines-10611929
Oddly, the CPS website earlier said that they have nothing out for consultation at the moment, so trawling still seems to be an accepted behaviour
- tdf
October 11, 2016 at 8:11 am -
I see Harvey Proctor is listed as a speaker at this event:
http://www.blmlaw.com/1975/21156/objects/events/abuse-conference—london–24-nov-2016.html
Fair play to him.
- tdf
October 11, 2016 at 11:38 am -
from Matthew Scott:
- Keith Walters
October 11, 2016 at 1:12 pm -
Yep. If you look closely you might just be able to make out the dime that the illustrious press are in the process of turning on
2017 is going to be the year of outrage at the rape of British justice and trial by (social!!) media, not the normal media, heaven forbid!- tdf
October 11, 2016 at 1:26 pm -
@Keith Walters
To be fair to him, Scott has been consistently sceptical on Exaro, and has been vindicated.
But I do know what you mean.
It really shouldn’t matter a damn if 95% of Twitter accounts, or 99% of Facebook accounts, or whatever, are true believers in the idea of vast uncovered ‘VIP’ abuse networks. None of that should matter to the administration of justice and to police actions.
Of course, as you rightly remind us, the ‘normal’ media has been feeding a lot of this social media hysteria (if indeed it is such), while pretending to have clean hands.
- tdf
- David
October 11, 2016 at 2:26 pm -
@tdf
I see that Matthew Scott said that officers from Midland went to Australia !
I wonder if they saw the same people that Justice Goddard visited in Australia?- tdf
October 11, 2016 at 2:41 pm -
@David
I don’t know.
It’s very interesting, though.
We know that there are potential Australian links to the disappearance (and presumed murder) of Martin Allen , and we also know that there is a potential Australian suspect.
- David
October 11, 2016 at 2:51 pm -
You’re thinking of Bevan Spencer von Einem ?
- tdf
October 11, 2016 at 2:52 pm -
Yep.
- tdf
- tdf
October 11, 2016 at 2:52 pm -
To remind ourselves, the potential suspect is still alive and well. In jail in Australia.
Known to have travelled internationally. Known to be of sadistic and also paedo-philiac inclination. And would have been approximately the same age, at the time of the Martin Allen disappearance, as the suspect, according to contemporaneous witness statements. And would have had a good reason to ‘get out of dodge’ around about that time period.
- David
October 11, 2016 at 3:04 pm -
Yes, he murdered Neil Muir, aged 25, in 1979; Alan Barnes, aged 17, in June 1979 in Australia.
- tdf
October 11, 2016 at 3:39 pm -
Ok. They might have travelled to Australia to try to find out if Bevan Spencer von Einem had an alibi for 5 November 1979.
- David
October 11, 2016 at 5:00 pm -
You are right I think he was planning a trip to London, which would have been about 1980/81 but he was trying to sell his car for the money to travel. His ‘modus operandi’ certainly fitted in much better with ‘Nicks’ descriptions far more than playing a headmaster.
- David
- The Blocked Dwarf
October 11, 2016 at 6:31 pm -
David, you might want to refrain from libellous statements here, for the Landlady’s sake. At least chuck in the odd ‘strongly suspected of’ or ‘was charged with but OZ-CPS presented no evidence’, yeah?
- David
October 11, 2016 at 6:45 pm -
Yes, You are right, was found guilty of the murder of Richard Kelvin, but not Neil Muir, or Alan Barnes.
- Bandini
October 12, 2016 at 9:45 am -
Er, then again the reason they went to Australia may have had something to do with the fact they were investigating the disappearance of the son of an Australian Embassy worker, eh? You don’t think they might have wanted to interview people (Australian people…) who had been working there, perhaps? God’s teeth…
Meanwhile, David’s daft idea over Goddard takes a bullet:
“Dame Lowell Goddard received £80,000 in pay and allowances when she quit as head of the inquiry into child sexual abuse, the Home Office has confirmed. The New Zealand high court judge received a severance payment of two months’ salary and flights home when she resigned 18 months after being hired by the then home secretary, Theresa May.”
So Saint Goddard had to go as she was ‘prevented’ from telling the truth – but still felt able to accept a big cash payout from the state that was trying to shut her up, eh, David, thereby becoming a part of the cover up in exchange for eighty thousand pieces of silver? Ho ho ho! What a total nutter you are.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/11/dame-lowell-goddard-former-head-child-abuse-inquiry-80000-payoff- David
October 12, 2016 at 11:40 am -
@Bandini Ben Emmerson QC, Elizabeth Prochaska Barrister, and Justice Goddard all have professional duties of confidentiality and cannot say why they really left. They cannot disclose confidential information, so it is better for a cover story to be issued in order to prevent adversely affecting the interests and welfare of third parties.
She, like others, went to Australia, I believe, to talk with ASIS The Australian Secret Intelligence Service.
- Bandini
October 12, 2016 at 1:08 pm -
David’s bookcase (courtesy of MI6 ‘X-ray vision spy-cam’):
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/e2/19/90/e21990640fe6351d5747d38248887b22.jpg
- Bandini
- David
- Bandini
- David
- tdf
- David
- David
- tdf
- Keith Walters
- David
October 11, 2016 at 5:12 pm -
Sorry later – Von Einem also addressed the issue of the noisy exhaust on the car heard during the abduction of Kelvin, by stating that the exhaust on his Ford Falcon (which he sold on July 16, 1983 to raise money for his overseas trip) was less than two years old and in good condition.
- Bandini
October 12, 2016 at 9:47 am -
(To A Potted Plant – see what you’ve started here?!?)
- Bandini
{ 73 comments… read them below or add one }