Non aviation content. Play nice – No religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
#1670622
stevelup wrote:
Genghis the Engineer wrote:AINAL


Hope you had plenty of lube...


No idea, so cautiously googled it and it came back with "Someone who love big things and chubby people in a sexual way." Talk about drift!

Anyway, maybe the reason she didn't admit it if the first place and is now appealing is she wasn't driving.

Being found guilty doesn't always mean you did it, that is why we have an appeals process.

Probably is guilty though.

I have this theory that in 95% of Court cases one party knows they are wrong, which to me means a significant chunk of solicitors are defending people they know are guilty. To me, that makes anyone being a litigation solicitor, inherently crooked.
#1670624
Sooty25 wrote:I have this theory that in 95% of Court cases one party knows they are wrong, which to me means a significant chunk of solicitors are defending people they know are guilty. To me, that makes anyone being a litigation solicitor, inherently crooked.


In English courts, the lawyers are there to argue the toss about who has the best case (aka adversarial system), rather than the truth per se -- in other words, their opinion of their client's guilt is not relevant, ergo they are not "inherently crooked". If you want a system that at least attempts to get at all the facts, then you need to hop over the Channel where the French have just such an approach (aka inquisitorial system).
#1670805
Ummm..,how about Scots Law?
No need to pay Eurostar, and we’ve had an uneven number on a jury for centuries to avoid the idiot trap of “evens”...

Comparing legal systems without knowing how they work in reality is a subject I leave to my friends who make a living out of it and who thrive on the philosophical and intellectual intricacies of that subject

That said, my wife watches enough French legal thrillers and I have enough Belgian cop friends to say: don’t fall into the “grass is greener” conundrum.

CSI point in case. Dinner party conversation just over a year ago got onto the idea of a perfect murder here in Belgium (legal differences with France aren’t huge).

Participants were:
2 senior cops
Croque-morts (under taker)
Lawyer
Generaliste (family doc)
Tax Inspector
+the rest of us

Basically. in France or Belgium- if you had the help of just one cop/undertaker/MD of even lawyer, there would be almost no possibility you’d get caught.

Given the recent demise of the MIL, and the quite blatant acts of thievery by some “professionals” - which are then covered up by their colleague professionals - don’t wish for something you think is more than you have, but is in reality much much less.
#1670859
I wouldn't want a lying lawyer representing me either in court or as an MP.

She's still pulling down her salary for representing and advising constituents while in pokey.

Perhaps they'll shove it up to 12 months and trigger automatic expulsion as an MP.

Peter :wink:

OK, I appreciate there is a body of opinion that says most lawyers are lying bar-stewards
#1677502
I have to hold a valid DBS to run a scout group, granted some criminal history wouldn't prevent me from doing that it would be on a case by case basis (i'm always disappointed when my DBS comes back clear and i think what a boring life we have).

I guess people with criminal records and intents need fair representation in Parliament as well.
#1677665
She was released under the early release scheme, and will be required to wear an electronic tag. To be fair, I'm guessing that she will have found that being in gaol is not very pleasant so it may well have had a deterrent effect.
#1677675
PaulB wrote:She was released under the early release scheme, and will be required to wear an electronic tag. To be fair, I'm guessing that she will have found that being in gaol is not very pleasant so it may well have had a deterrent effect.


Being an unemployed, former MP would have also had that effect! Well, I guess we know for certain at least one of our representatives is a lying criminal, just a few more to prove!
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7