Non aviation content. Play nice – No religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
#1669843
Remind me again when the moral relativism kicks in?

Bint gets banged up for lying about going a bit too fast, lying about it and doing zero actual harm.

B.lies to Parliament, the British and Iraqi people, gets huge consultancy fees.

As I said, I scratch my head with British justice.
#1669847
OCB wrote:B.lies to Parliament, the British and Iraqi people, gets huge consultancy fees.

As I said, I scratch my head with British justice.

Neither of which is justification for what she did, nor should they be a consideration in her sentencing.

For an MP AND lawyer to try and pervert the course of justice over a 41mph speeding offence in a 30mph limit demonstrates someone not sound of mind. To plan to deceive and go through with the lie, demonstrates it was not a gut reaction. And let's not forget that, as a lawyer, she would be fully aware of the consequences of her actions.

How could she be trusted as either an MP, or lawyer in the futures?
#1669856
eltonioni wrote:More pointless imprisonment, especially if she doesn't feel the need to resign. The very public destruction of her career and reputation should be more than enough punishment.

You have point, eltonioni, however how does the court sentence her to lose her job and be struck off?

It will be interesting to see whether she resigns, or intends to take her salary whilst in jail. If indeed she loses her appeal, which I believe she will.
#1669870
I wonder how common this points swapping is. There's been at least two convictions like this, of high profile political figures. That's a pretty small pool.
Not suggesting that people say so :)
A quick search gives figures of 1 in 5 (the Sun) 1 in 20 (Dailymail) and prisoners for £200 (Telegraph).
#1669873
Although the reporting is current the actual offence occurred just one month after she became an MP, I can't help but think this shows a severe lack of judgment.

The offence was 41mph in a 30 limit, hardly a flogging offence, why on earth put everything at risk for such a trivial (in the scheme of things) offence. Something doesn't add up.
#1669888
OCB wrote:Why am I sensing a bit of cognitive dissonance re: Blair going on?



He made a judgement based on the information he had at the time, and the need for unity with a key ally. He could have opted out, he chose not to. The decision was wrong.

This woman tried to defy what she knew to be true. It’s very different.
#1669895
Jim Jones wrote:
OCB wrote:Why am I sensing a bit of cognitive dissonance re: Blair going on?



He made a judgement based on the information he had at the time, and the need for unity with a key ally. He could have opted out, he chose not to. The decision was wrong.

This woman tried to defy what she knew to be true. It’s very different.


I remember that judgement, downloaded and printed the dodgy dossier. My pretty scraggy knowledge of Saddam's capabilities, and the fact that Hans Blix etc were "boots on the ground" goes far against Blair's assertion he was acting on best info.

That was even before certain letters appeared, and I was no expert. Neither were the several million others Brits who openly objected to that war.

In a moral relativistic/absolutist POV: Blair has made millions off the death of tens of thousands at least. Yer lass - did what again?
#1669899
gasman wrote:
Miscellaneous wrote:however how does the court sentence her to lose her job and be struck off?

.


If the court gives a custodial sentence greater than 12 months imprisonment then an MP is disbarred from holding office.

The question was relating to had there not been any custodial sentence.

@OCB , so Blair deserves life. The fact he didn't get it is not reason to let others off. Would you propose only to show leniency for this MP, or all citizens convicted since the Iraq war? :D
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7