NFL UK Forums - View Single Post - Politics
Thread: Politics
View Single Post
  #16610  
Old 08.07.2019, 11:33 AM
LesterHayes's Avatar
LesterHayes LesterHayes is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 21.08.2012
Posts: 3,179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lee harris 10 View Post
hold on she said the was "no complaint" over using either number so dont see how she concluded that there where any "false" statements(just normal politics) and you miss out the whole chapter on the district judge and how this case should never have made it to any higher court because there was no case and the other party was a total chancer who lied about almost everything.
Lee, "there would have been no complaint" was the whole quote not there was "no complaint". That is very different.

Justice whatshername is saying that had Johnson used a figure of 350 gross or 250 nett "there would have been no complaint". He didn't use either qualification though did he ergo there should have been cause for complaint because the figure of 350 million is not what we give the EU as the ONS and countless other people have said. Unfortunately the law does not allow prosecution when the actual numbers are in the public domain. Which they were. Just no one actually read them.

The judge also concluded it had not been demonstrated that Mr Johnson made the comments "as he discharged the duties of (his) office".

Really? Did he resign his position during the referendum? Did I miss something?

Also, although Parliament had passed legislation to make it a criminal offence for anyone to make false statements about a candidate during a campaign for the purposes of stopping them being elected the judges concluded that it also had "deliberately excluded" legislating to include false factual statements about statistics within the auspices of the criminal law.

"Parliament twice made a choice not to do precisely that which the interested party now seeks to achieve" they ruled.

If that isn't a legal technicality, I don't know what is? There is no way anyone could read this as an exoneration of Boris. Well, no one except you that is.

Regarding your other comments, personally I don't really care about the judge that passed the case up the ladder. Maybe she was politically motivated too? Maybe she just thought better safe than sorry? Who knows, Case dismissed anyway but I did say I'd withhold judgement until the reasoning was published and the reasoning for dismissing the claim is ultimately on a technical point of law and the presumption the general public actually have minds of their own. Depressingly an awful lot of people (most of them not judges) don't.

As to the guy that brought the case; what did he have to gain apart from notoriety? I can't see a money making scheme behind it unless he was hoping that Boris would buy him off or something? He should have known better; Johnson is more likely to have paid to have him beaten up. In your post you suggest he "was a total chancer who lied about almost everything"?

Example?

Last edited by LesterHayes; 08.07.2019 at 03:17 PM.
Reply With Quote