I wonder if there are other examples of rule bending/ marginal cases/ rule breaking / sensible application of rules (delete as appropriate) across politicians & media notables? If Cummings goes it will be open season. Are there politicians in all parties shifting uncomfortably?
The big thing here is that the government has effectively announced that the laws were for little people (and that the entire commentariat are little people).
What law was broken? Maybe let the Police know a law was broken. Oh and the DCMO.
If you're claiming having an unsupervised three year old isn't harmful then you're deranged.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the manner in which they arranged for supervision of their three year old is far more harmful. Far better for them to call social services if that was the issue. They could have killed someone through infection. They could have killed me if I had run into them and become infected. Or are you saying I should prioretise a stranger's kid over my own life?
And the excuse they gave is not one of the permissable reasons. You might disagree with the law, plenty do, but he broke it - whatever some plod in Durham says.
If I and my wife were ill I'd get my family to take care of them not social services.
He didn't break the law. You can leave if you have a reasonable reason. He did.
He broke the law. The "reasonable excuse" defences are listed in Regulation 6(2) of the Covid Regs. His actions satisfy none of them. He can plead to the contrary but it should be before a court who are the final arbiters of law in this country. If he did nothing wrong he has nothing to fear. As it is, even a cursory reading of Regulation 6, proves he did.
What court? On what charge? He's meant to present himself in court spontaneously, force them to try him, then defend himself against a non-existent charge just to satisfy the political opponents who hate him?
That's utterly bonkers.
He should be prosecuted before a magistrates court, like many will be who have done less, under regulation 9(1) of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 for a breach of regulation 6 of the same statute. If convicted, he should be fined like everyone else.
We are all supposed to be equal before the law in this country and given his excuse is not listed as a "reasonable" one in regulation 6(2) he needs to be forced, by the CPS, to justify why what he did was reasonable, rather than arranging for his children to be taken in by friends, or not dancing to ABBA..
There's a clear case here that he has committed a criminal offence and a court needs to decide if that is right. If your excuse for being out and about is not one listed in the regulations, and you have symptoms of the virus, then there's enough to prosecute and let a mags court decide.
EDIT - 9(1) - sorry
Maybe he’ll be next up after Eadric explaining that while advocating a Chinese style hard lockdown for the rest of us, he was illegally travelling to an illegally rented bolt hole in South Wales.
Unfortunately for you I left London before lockdown. Because, unlike you, I saw corona coming
Renting accommodation away from home became illegal irrespective of when you made the booking.
Your assertion that your foresight was greater than mine won’t survive even a cursory review of PB archives during February and March. Most of what you posted here back then has subsequently proved to be hyperbolic nonsense.
Again, you’re wrong. I was given the flat by a wealthy friend. You’re just embarrassing yourself now
You are welcome to examine the ‘stay at home’ regulations and explain how driving across the country to stay at a flat of a wealthy friend hundred of miles away from your actual home in any way complies....
That you have sought to advocate restrictions for the rest of us while taking the p**s yourself speaks volumes.
Driving into Wales to stay away from home is illegal even now.
Lol. I drove here when it was legal. Before lockdown. I was given the flat, I didn’t rent it.
I did all this before there were any regulations to break.
I mean, your case is slightly weak, isn’t it?
One day I’ll tell you why he gave me the flat. If you want to be properly humiliated.
I think you’ll find that the landlord’s motivation is entirely irrelevant under the Coronavirus Act and subsequent regulations.
JR-M is carefully not saying "DC was right in what he did" and in this he is participating in what seems to be the party line. Which means the party line has not yet decided that DC must or can survive.
One thing that I really cant have about this - people saying thing to the effect of
"My Dad was dying but I didn't go and see him, yet the elite are going to their second homes..."
I am sorry for anyones loss, but if my Dad was dying, I would go and see him one last time even if it meant getting put in prison afterwards, which would not be the consequence of doing so in the UK during the lockdown anyway. Why would you not?
Firstly, would you be allowed into the hospital or care home?
Secondly, unfortunately many deaths are somewhat unpredictable. Would you visit your father if he'd suffered a serious heart attack, for example, and was given a 50/50 chance of pulling through?
If my Dad was potentially dying of a heart attack would I visit him? 1.01 would be a bet that I would. who wouldn't?
That wasn't what I asked. I asked about the situation where he was seriously ill and may or may not pull through.
And no, I wouldn't if the rules said I mustn't. I'd Skype and comply with the rules.
"That wasn't what I asked. I asked about the situation where he was seriously ill and may or may not pull through."
I thought "potentially dying of a heart attack" was the situation you imagined? Anyway, the answer to your question is that if my Dad might be dying I would break the law to go and see him. I have broken it to go and see him several times in the last 10 weeks anyway
Would you break into a hospital or care home that forbade visits?
I guess I would go to the hospital and try and find a way of seeing him, not sure if I would storm the ICU. I'd try to get him out of the care home
I see the government's line to take (possibly stipulated by the man himself) is that Dom 'Super Dad' Cummings is in fact a parental role model whose behaviour should be praised to the skies.
NE top of the death chart today. Thanks Dom for doing your bit in that levelling up.
The explanation for which (given the three week delay) can only be that somehow the regions with the earlier crisis have somehow bumped up against some sort of widespread immunity or resistance.
The big thing here is that the government has effectively announced that the laws were for little people (and that the entire commentariat are little people).
What law was broken? Maybe let the Police know a law was broken. Oh and the DCMO.
If you're claiming having an unsupervised three year old isn't harmful then you're deranged.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the manner in which they arranged for supervision of their three year old is far more harmful. Far better for them to call social services if that was the issue. They could have killed someone through infection. They could have killed me if I had run into them and become infected. Or are you saying I should prioretise a stranger's kid over my own life?
And the excuse they gave is not one of the permissable reasons. You might disagree with the law, plenty do, but he broke it - whatever some plod in Durham says.
If I and my wife were ill I'd get my family to take care of them not social services.
He didn't break the law. You can leave if you have a reasonable reason. He did.
He broke the law. The "reasonable excuse" defences are listed in Regulation 6(2) of the Covid Regs. His actions satisfy none of them. He can plead to the contrary but it should be before a court who are the final arbiters of law in this country. If he did nothing wrong he has nothing to fear. As it is, even a cursory reading of Regulation 6, proves he did.
What court? On what charge? He's meant to present himself in court spontaneously, force them to try him, then defend himself against a non-existent charge just to satisfy the political opponents who hate him?
That's utterly bonkers.
He should be prosecuted before a magistrates court, like many will be who have done less, under regulation 9(1) of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 for a breach of regulation 6 of the same statute. If convicted, he should be fined like everyone else.
We are all supposed to be equal before the law in this country and given his excuse is not listed as a "reasonable" one in regulation 6(2) he needs to be forced, by the CPS, to justify why what he did was reasonable, rather than arranging for his children to be taken in by friends, or not dancing to ABBA..
There's a clear case here that he has committed a criminal offence and a court needs to decide if that is right. If your excuse for being out and about is not one listed in the regulations, and you have symptoms of the virus, then there's enough to prosecute and let a mags court decide.
EDIT - 9(1) - sorry
Except his reason does meet at least one of the reasons.
Plus reasonable under law is a deliberate term.
Plus the list isn't defined as exhaustive.
So besides the fact his reason is included and that it wouldn't matter if it wasn't so long as it was reasonable . . .
Except his reason does meet at least one of the reasons. - no it doesn't
Plus reasonable under law is a deliberate term. - citation?
Plus the list isn't defined as exhaustive. - true but I have dealt with this point up thread.
It does.
As I keep saying to you and you keep ignoring one of the reasons is to avoid harm.
Leaving a three year old without adult supervision is harmful.
Or do you think leaving a three year old without supervision isn't harmful?
This is painful.
As I keep telling you, reg 6(2)(m) doesn't help him. You must "need" (i.e.circumstances in which something is necessary) to travel to avoid harm (start of the relevant section) to have a defence under that section and, because there were childcare alternatives place in London, up to and including social services, there was no "need" for him to travel to avoid harm to his kids.
And that is before we get onto the question of whether his symptoms were severe enough to preclude childcare which, it seems, they were not. Plenty of couples nationwide have managed childcare while suffering from C19 and they were not able to dance to ABBA.
I wait for you to move the goalposts again.
You're wrong. You're making shit up and getting it backwards.
Social services are a last resort if you don't have access to family. He did. And if you're able to leave the home to avoid harm there's no limit on how far you travel to get somewhere safe with family. Just the requirements to have a need which he did.
That you think people should go to social services for children before family is insane.
That you think people should expose others to a lethal virus instead of going to social services is the insane viewpoint. Social services won't kill your kids, travelling with coronavirus might kill someone elses, so his choice was not reasonable. Indeed his choice may have killed his own parents.
Your view is not how the law works, nor is it how statutory interpretation works. Courts look at the intention of Parliament. Here the intention of Parliament was to prevent the spread of Covid-19. The purpose of this law is to discourage travel in order to do so, so Parliament's intention should be interpreted in that way. Accordingly Cummings should have looked at alternatives to travel (up to and including social services) before deciding upon travel that would expose others to Covid-19.
Social services are indeed, in normal times, a last resort if you have no access to family. These are not normal times. Parliament put the interests of the nation first - above the interests of individuals and their families. Cummings broke the law. There were plenty of alternatives in London for him to obtain childcare, he chose to ignore them, so he had no reasonable excuse for his dangerous actions that probably exposed several dozen people to the virus he was suffering from.
I'm still trying to piece together the case for the defence from the various bits of information flying around the media.
Is this more or less it?
Cummings's wife already had symptoms. Cummings assumed he had also been infected, though he wasn't symptomatic yet. To save his child from harm in case both of them became incapacitated and it was impossible to arrange for it to be cared for in London, all three of them (including the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings) travelled with the child to county Durham, where they had the offer of childcare from family members. After Cummings developed symptoms, all three of them self-isolated in county Durham. Later, they realised that if people learned what had happened they might not agree that the journey to county Durham was justified, and decided to give people the impression that they had all self-isolated in London.
I'm still trying to piece together the case for the defence from the various bits of information flying around the media.
Is this more or less it?
Cummings's wife already had symptoms. Cummings assumed he had also been infected, though he wasn't symptomatic yet. To save his child from harm in case both of them became incapacitated and it was impossible to arrange for it to be cared for in London, all three of them (including the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings) travelled with the child to county Durham, where they had the offer of childcare from family members. After Cummings developed symptoms, all three of them self-isolated in county Durham. Later, they realised that if people learned what had happened they might not agree that the journey to county Durham was justified, and decided to give people the impression that they had all self-isolated in London.
Is that right?
Yes, I think that's the story.
Edit - if that's true then it's fair, but if they stopped at any point and came into contact with other people then it becomes untenable and he has to go.
JR-M is carefully not saying "DC was right in what he did" and in this he is participating in what seems to be the party line. Which means the party line has not yet decided that DC must or can survive.
Mate, I've stuck 3 figures on Classic Dom still being in his job in June.
JR-M is carefully not saying "DC was right in what he did" and in this he is participating in what seems to be the party line. Which means the party line has not yet decided that DC must or can survive.
Mate, I've stuck 3 figures on Classic Dom still being in his job in June.
I'm still trying to piece together the case for the defence from the various bits of information flying around the media.
Is this more or less it?
Cummings's wife already had symptoms. Cummings assumed he had also been infected, though he wasn't symptomatic yet. To save his child from harm in case both of them became incapacitated and it was impossible to arrange for it to be cared for in London, all three of them (including the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings) travelled with the child to county Durham, where they had the offer of childcare from family members. After Cummings developed symptoms, all three of them self-isolated in county Durham. Later, they realised that if people learned what had happened they might not agree that the journey to county Durham was justified, and decided to give people the impression that they had all self-isolated in London.
Is that right?
That's more or less it apart from the fact that they all pissed en famille behind a bush next to the A1(M).
I'm still trying to piece together the case for the defence from the various bits of information flying around the media.
Is this more or less it?
Cummings's wife already had symptoms. Cummings assumed he had also been infected, though he wasn't symptomatic yet. To save his child from harm in case both of them became incapacitated and it was impossible to arrange for it to be cared for in London, all three of them (including the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings) travelled with the child to county Durham, where they had the offer of childcare from family members. After Cummings developed symptoms, all three of them self-isolated in county Durham. Later, they realised that if people learned what had happened they might not agree that the journey to county Durham was justified, and decided to give people the impression that they had all self-isolated in London.
Is that right?
Yes, it really is as simple and airtight as that. No obvious further questions arising from it. Case closed, verdict "Super Dad". Nothing to see here.
I'm still trying to piece together the case for the defence from the various bits of information flying around the media.
Is this more or less it?
Cummings's wife already had symptoms. Cummings assumed he had also been infected, though he wasn't symptomatic yet. To save his child from harm in case both of them became incapacitated and it was impossible to arrange for it to be cared for in London, all three of them (including the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings) travelled with the child to county Durham, where they had the offer of childcare from family members. After Cummings developed symptoms, all three of them self-isolated in county Durham. Later, they realised that if people learned what had happened they might not agree that the journey to county Durham was justified, and decided to give people the impression that they had all self-isolated in London.
Is that right?
Yes, I think that's the story.
Edit - if that's true then it's fair, but if they stopped at any point and came into contact with other people then it becomes untenable and he has to go.
I wonder if there is any CCTV footage at the service stations? Or will it have all been deleted by now?
The Tories have all been given the same line to Tweet then. They have very few original thoughts between them.
I believe this is what the psychologists call 'projection', my dear cult escapee.
You’re in a cult yourself, the Tory cult.
It's only a cult if you lose
You make less sense as each day passes.
The Tory party is a cult especially if your born into It naturally progress through the YCs meet you future partner there, come from a privileged background and then progress to branch member and onwards. The blue team can do no wrong they are the ones destined to rule at all levels of government. A useless Tory councillor is better than a good none Tory. I see vey little similarity in any other political party.
JR-M is carefully not saying "DC was right in what he did" and in this he is participating in what seems to be the party line. Which means the party line has not yet decided that DC must or can survive.
Mate, I've stuck 3 figures on Classic Dom still being in his job in June.
Fucker is staying or I will be furious.
What odds? 2/5 I saw
Got 7/20 for some of it and 1/3 for the rest.
Regret missing out on the 1/2 that was available earlier today. Took too long to think about it and the apparently my Will Hill account has problems and I need to contact support for it to be unlocked.
I'm still trying to piece together the case for the defence from the various bits of information flying around the media.
Is this more or less it?
Cummings's wife already had symptoms. Cummings assumed he had also been infected, though he wasn't symptomatic yet. To save his child from harm in case both of them became incapacitated and it was impossible to arrange for it to be cared for in London, all three of them (including the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings) travelled with the child to county Durham, where they had the offer of childcare from family members. After Cummings developed symptoms, all three of them self-isolated in county Durham. Later, they realised that if people learned what had happened they might not agree that the journey to county Durham was justified, and decided to give people the impression that they had all self-isolated in London.
Is that right?
Yes, I think that's the story.
Edit - if that's true then it's fair, but if they stopped at any point and came into contact with other people then it becomes untenable and he has to go.
I doubt the assertion about saving the child from harm would hold up in court.
But what really puzzles me is what the justification was for the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings travelling from London to county Durham. Why was that necessary?
I'm still trying to piece together the case for the defence from the various bits of information flying around the media.
Is this more or less it?
Cummings's wife already had symptoms. Cummings assumed he had also been infected, though he wasn't symptomatic yet. To save his child from harm in case both of them became incapacitated and it was impossible to arrange for it to be cared for in London, all three of them (including the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings) travelled with the child to county Durham, where they had the offer of childcare from family members. After Cummings developed symptoms, all three of them self-isolated in county Durham. Later, they realised that if people learned what had happened they might not agree that the journey to county Durham was justified, and decided to give people the impression that they had all self-isolated in London.
Is that right?
That's more or less it apart from the fact that they all pissed en famille behind a bush next to the A1(M).
O/T
Sad day here in Hamburg-Altona. 0:4 desaster against SV Darmstadt 98. Sigh.
It certainly seems as though no one with small children who feels they may be ill, or in danger or becoming ill, can now be prevented from travelling if they have an offer of help with childcare anywhere in the country.
The Tories have all been given the same line to Tweet then. They have very few original thoughts between them.
I believe this is what the psychologists call 'projection', my dear cult escapee.
You’re in a cult yourself, the Tory cult.
It's only a cult if you lose
You make less sense as each day passes.
The Tory party is a cult especially if your born into It naturally progress through the YCs meet you future partner there, come from a privileged background and then progress to branch member and onwards. The blue team can do no wrong they are the ones destined to rule at all levels of government. A useless Tory councillor is better than a good none Tory. I see vey little similarity in any other political party.
Agreed and this "protecting a 3 year old" line that they have all been told to take is morally repugnant because it is total bullshit. There were numerous ways the kid could have been cared for in London without the need to break quarantine. All trying to hide behind a 3 year old. Pitiful
JR-M is carefully not saying "DC was right in what he did" and in this he is participating in what seems to be the party line. Which means the party line has not yet decided that DC must or can survive.
Mate, I've stuck 3 figures on Classic Dom still being in his job in June.
Fucker is staying or I will be furious.
That’s risky. I’d say it’s about 50/50. Remember newspaper editors nearly always keep something in reserve in a scoop, so as to prolong the tension, increase sales, and inflict more damage
If someone can produce CCTV footage of him at a motorway service station it could be all over for him.
The big thing here is that the government has effectively announced that the laws were for little people (and that the entire commentariat are little people).
What law was broken? Maybe let the Police know a law was broken. Oh and the DCMO.
If you're claiming having an unsupervised three year old isn't harmful then you're deranged.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the manner in which they arranged for supervision of their three year old is far more harmful. Far better for them to call social services if that was the issue. They could have killed someone through infection. They could have killed me if I had run into them and become infected. Or are you saying I should prioretise a stranger's kid over my own life?
And the excuse they gave is not one of the permissable reasons. You might disagree with the law, plenty do, but he broke it - whatever some plod in Durham says.
If I and my wife were ill I'd get my family to take care of them not social services.
He didn't break the law. You can leave if you have a reasonable reason. He did.
He broke the law. The "reasonable excuse" defences are listed in Regulation 6(2) of the Covid Regs. His actions satisfy none of them. He can plead to the contrary but it should be before a court who are the final arbiters of law in this country. If he did nothing wrong he has nothing to fear. As it is, even a cursory reading of Regulation 6, proves he did.
What court? On what charge? He's meant to present himself in court spontaneously, force them to try him, then defend himself against a non-existent charge just to satisfy the political opponents who hate him?
That's utterly bonkers.
He should be prosecuted before a magistrates court, like many will be who have done less, under regulation 9(1) of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 for a breach of regulation 6 of the same statute. If convicted, he should be fined like everyone else.
We are all supposed to be equal before the law in this country and given his excuse is not listed as a "reasonable" one in regulation 6(2) he needs to be forced, by the CPS, to justify why what he did was reasonable, rather than arranging for his children to be taken in by friends, or not dancing to ABBA..
There's a clear case here that he has committed a criminal offence and a court needs to decide if that is right. If your excuse for being out and about is not one listed in the regulations, and you have symptoms of the virus, then there's enough to prosecute and let a mags court decide.
EDIT - 9(1) - sorry
Maybe he’ll be next up after Eadric explaining that while advocating a Chinese style hard lockdown for the rest of us, he was illegally travelling to an illegally rented bolt hole in South Wales.
Unfortunately for you I left London before lockdown. Because, unlike you, I saw corona coming
Renting accommodation away from home became illegal irrespective of when you made the booking.
Your assertion that your foresight was greater than mine won’t survive even a cursory review of PB archives during February and March. Most of what you posted here back then has subsequently proved to be hyperbolic nonsense.
Again, you’re wrong. I was given the flat by a wealthy friend. You’re just embarrassing yourself now
You are welcome to examine the ‘stay at home’ regulations and explain how driving across the country to stay at a flat of a wealthy friend hundred of miles away from your actual home in any way complies....
That you have sought to advocate restrictions for the rest of us while taking the p**s yourself speaks volumes.
Driving into Wales to stay away from home is illegal even now.
Lol. I drove here when it was legal. Before lockdown. I was given the flat, I didn’t rent it.
I did all this before there were any regulations to break.
I mean, your case is slightly weak, isn’t it?
One day I’ll tell you why he gave me the flat. If you want to be properly humiliated.
I think you’ll find that the landlord’s motivation is entirely irrelevant under the Coronavirus Act and subsequent regulations.
He gave it to me. He didn’t rent it to me. He has more than one house.
And I moved here before the Act came into force on March 26
The Tories have all been given the same line to Tweet then. They have very few original thoughts between them.
I believe this is what the psychologists call 'projection', my dear cult escapee.
You’re in a cult yourself, the Tory cult.
It's only a cult if you lose
You make less sense as each day passes.
The Tory party is a cult especially if your born into It naturally progress through the YCs meet you future partner there, come from a privileged background and then progress to branch member and onwards. The blue team can do no wrong they are the ones destined to rule at all levels of government. A useless Tory councillor is better than a good none Tory. I see vey little similarity in any other political party.
Total nonsense. I am no longer a member, but was for many years. You are describing a caricature of the Tory party of 50 years ago. It is now a quite different organisation, which could be described as a cult, but not the type you describe. It is largely made up of pro-Brexit thugs at the grassroots level who would be just as at home in UKIP or even BNP. Although, he is alleged to not be a member, Cummings typifies the current activist. As for your description, it could equally apply to Labour. There are numerous powerful families within Labour, the Benns, the Kinnochs etc.
The Tories have all been given the same line to Tweet then. They have very few original thoughts between them.
I believe this is what the psychologists call 'projection', my dear cult escapee.
You’re in a cult yourself, the Tory cult.
It's only a cult if you lose
You make less sense as each day passes.
The Tory party is a cult especially if your born into It naturally progress through the YCs meet you future partner there, come from a privileged background and then progress to branch member and onwards. The blue team can do no wrong they are the ones destined to rule at all levels of government. A useless Tory councillor is better than a good none Tory. I see vey little similarity in any other political party.
Total nonsense. I am no longer a member, but was for many years. You are describing a caricature of the Tory party of 50 years ago. It is now a quite different organisation, which could be described as a cult, but not the type you describe. It is largely made up of pro-Brexit thugs at the grassroots level who would be just as at home in UKIP or even BNP. Although, he is alleged to not be a member, Cummings typifies the current activist. As for your description, it could equally apply to Labour. There are numerous powerful families within Labour, the Benns, the Kinnochs etc.
Huh, actually ended up being quite balanced by the end.
Boris showed tremendous kindness it taking in this Cummings chap, who appears to be some sort of deranged rough-sleeper, but it was beyond the call of duty to allow him to run the country during a crisis.
I'm still trying to piece together the case for the defence from the various bits of information flying around the media.
Is this more or less it?
Cummings's wife already had symptoms. Cummings assumed he had also been infected, though he wasn't symptomatic yet. To save his child from harm in case both of them became incapacitated and it was impossible to arrange for it to be cared for in London, all three of them (including the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings) travelled with the child to county Durham, where they had the offer of childcare from family members. After Cummings developed symptoms, all three of them self-isolated in county Durham. Later, they realised that if people learned what had happened they might not agree that the journey to county Durham was justified, and decided to give people the impression that they had all self-isolated in London.
Is that right?
Yes, it really is as simple and airtight as that. No obvious further questions arising from it. Case closed, verdict "Super Dad". Nothing to see here.
Oh dear, you really are a blinkered loyalist. What did they inject you with? "Nothing to see here?" Are you mad? Why do you think they tried to cover it up? It is nothing short of fucking outrageous. There have been maybe millions of people who have not travelled to see their family because they were following government guidelines. Here we have two people, who should know better, not only travelling, but travelling half the length of the country, and actually in the full knowledge they most likely have the virus!!!
Then there is the issue of the reality of travelling that distance. They must have filled up with petrol. They probably stopped for food. They possibly passed the virus to people in his families locality who would not have otherwise had it.
He should resign. He won't of course, because he has no honour.
I'm still trying to piece together the case for the defence from the various bits of information flying around the media.
Is this more or less it?
Cummings's wife already had symptoms. Cummings assumed he had also been infected, though he wasn't symptomatic yet. To save his child from harm in case both of them became incapacitated and it was impossible to arrange for it to be cared for in London, all three of them (including the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings) travelled with the child to county Durham, where they had the offer of childcare from family members. After Cummings developed symptoms, all three of them self-isolated in county Durham. Later, they realised that if people learned what had happened they might not agree that the journey to county Durham was justified, and decided to give people the impression that they had all self-isolated in London.
Is that right?
Nearly then got assistant CMO to give out guff about ok in emergency for child, meanwhile you can bet media and BBC knew about it and it was quashed.
The Tories have all been given the same line to Tweet then. They have very few original thoughts between them.
I believe this is what the psychologists call 'projection', my dear cult escapee.
You’re in a cult yourself, the Tory cult.
It's only a cult if you lose
You make less sense as each day passes.
The Tory party is a cult especially if your born into It naturally progress through the YCs meet you future partner there, come from a privileged background and then progress to branch member and onwards. The blue team can do no wrong they are the ones destined to rule at all levels of government. A useless Tory councillor is better than a good none Tory. I see vey little similarity in any other political party.
Total nonsense. I am no longer a member, but was for many years. You are describing a caricature of the Tory party of 50 years ago. It is now a quite different organisation, which could be described as a cult, but not the type you describe. It is largely made up of pro-Brexit thugs at the grassroots level who would be just as at home in UKIP or even BNP. Although, he is alleged to not be a member, Cummings typifies the current activist. As for your description, it could equally apply to Labour. There are numerous powerful families within Labour, the Benns, the Kinnochs etc.
Don't forget the Straws. I attended a pre-2016 panel discussion with Will Straw. IMO his surname justifies his position in society and little else.
I'm still trying to piece together the case for the defence from the various bits of information flying around the media.
Is this more or less it?
Cummings's wife already had symptoms. Cummings assumed he had also been infected, though he wasn't symptomatic yet. To save his child from harm in case both of them became incapacitated and it was impossible to arrange for it to be cared for in London, all three of them (including the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings) travelled with the child to county Durham, where they had the offer of childcare from family members. After Cummings developed symptoms, all three of them self-isolated in county Durham. Later, they realised that if people learned what had happened they might not agree that the journey to county Durham was justified, and decided to give people the impression that they had all self-isolated in London.
Is that right?
Yes, it really is as simple and airtight as that. No obvious further questions arising from it. Case closed, verdict "Super Dad". Nothing to see here.
Oh dear, you really are a blinkered loyalist. What did they inject you with? "Nothing to see here?" Are you mad? Why do you think they tried to cover it up? It is nothing short of fucking outrageous. There have been maybe millions of people who have not travelled to see their family because they were following government guidelines. Here we have two people, who should know better, not only travelling, but travelling half the length of the country, and actually in the full knowledge they most likely have the virus!!!
Then there is the issue of the reality of travelling that distance. They must have filled up with petrol. They probably stopped for food. They possibly passed the virus to people in his families locality who would not have otherwise had it.
He should resign. He won't of course, because he has no honour.
You possibly have your irony filter on. Go into "options", "settings" and click to switch off.
The issue for the public isn't who loves Dom. Its who loves their children.
If people think that this is hypocrisy then they'll be unforgiving.
If people think this was done in good faith to look after children and they'd have done the same thing then it will blow over besides people who hate Dom.
Glad you expressed this sentiment because I can now do THIS -
Affluent BAME woman with left wing views who opposes private schools puts love of her son above her politics and sends him to one. Let's call her Dorothy Arbuckle.
See?
I am not getting drawn on the Cummings thing as the facts seem to me to be unclear right now with the normal misrepresentations on both sides.
But I do fancy a riposte to your Dorothy Arbuckle example
Affluent hard left politician who opposes private schools puts political beliefs above his own family and divorces wife because she decides son should go to a better school than the local sink comprehensive. Lets call him James Carbuncle.
Personally I can understand Dorothy's actions. Mr Carbuncle's on the other hand seem utterly inhuman and unforgiveable.
Hope they didn't go double-barrelled, as with a surname like Arbuckle-Carbunkle that boy is toast at that sink comprehensive.
Comments
100% positive so far
Your view is not how the law works, nor is it how statutory interpretation works. Courts look at the intention of Parliament. Here the intention of Parliament was to prevent the spread of Covid-19. The purpose of this law is to discourage travel in order to do so, so Parliament's intention should be interpreted in that way. Accordingly Cummings should have looked at alternatives to travel (up to and including social services) before deciding upon travel that would expose others to Covid-19.
Social services are indeed, in normal times, a last resort if you have no access to family. These are not normal times. Parliament put the interests of the nation first - above the interests of individuals and their families. Cummings broke the law. There were plenty of alternatives in London for him to obtain childcare, he chose to ignore them, so he had no reasonable excuse for his dangerous actions that probably exposed several dozen people to the virus he was suffering from.
Is this more or less it?
Cummings's wife already had symptoms. Cummings assumed he had also been infected, though he wasn't symptomatic yet. To save his child from harm in case both of them became incapacitated and it was impossible to arrange for it to be cared for in London, all three of them (including the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings) travelled with the child to county Durham, where they had the offer of childcare from family members. After Cummings developed symptoms, all three of them self-isolated in county Durham. Later, they realised that if people learned what had happened they might not agree that the journey to county Durham was justified, and decided to give people the impression that they had all self-isolated in London.
Is that right?
Edit - if that's true then it's fair, but if they stopped at any point and came into contact with other people then it becomes untenable and he has to go.
Fucker is staying or I will be furious.
Covid Data Wranglers started screaming about how their deaths were still falling we must immediately reopen.
Georgia has a heavy lag on its Covid figures.
Guess which state is now showing an upsurge in Covid deaths?
Regret missing out on the 1/2 that was available earlier today. Took too long to think about it and the apparently my Will Hill account has problems and I need to contact support for it to be unlocked.
But what really puzzles me is what the justification was for the already symptomatic Mrs Cummings travelling from London to county Durham. Why was that necessary?
Shameless.
Sad day here in Hamburg-Altona. 0:4 desaster against SV Darmstadt 98. Sigh.
Fact remains, you should have been at home, and are in no position to be giving lectures about what rules the UK should have imposed on everyone else.
Then there is the issue of the reality of travelling that distance. They must have filled up with petrol. They probably stopped for food. They possibly passed the virus to people in his families locality who would not have otherwise had it.
He should resign. He won't of course, because he has no honour.