Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Team Biden now says he won’t be announcing his VP choice until

1356

Comments

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 40,731
    glw said:

    HYUFD said:
    How the hell could anybody of sound mind think that Donald "20,000 documented falsehoods" Trump is honest and trustworthy? He's literally one of the most dishonest people alive today. If lying was an Olympic event he'd be on the podium every time.
    Remember that Donald doesn't lie, he just has "alternative facts".
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 3,901
    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,602
    MaxPB said:

    International virus news, Iran has covered up the true scale of virus deaths.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-53598965

    No surprise there then. People really need to stop using the worldometers website. It only uses officially provided data which from a lot of countries is extremely suspect even including first world nations like Spain let alone those like Iran and Russia.

    Please then provide a link for a website that has more reliable data for all (or a large number of) countries in one place.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 6,292
    Nice article from David Spiegelhalter: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/02/uk-covid-19-excess-deaths

    It seems pretty conclusive that the UK has done very badly on COVID.
    I'm not sure I quite buy his, 'we won't know for years' answer. We can certainly debate the relative importance of particular mistakes, but some are clear.

    An earlier lockdown would have reduced deaths.
    Our protection of care homes has been lacking.

    Interesting though that our excess mortality was much more nationwide vs. the extreme highs seen in Italy and Spain in localized areas.

    One potential explanation he hints at is perhaps UK people are more likely to go to the infected areas in Spain/Italy than Spanish/Italian people from elsewhere in their respective countries. No idea if that's true or not.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 40,731

    eek said:

    Charles said:

    eek said:

    Charles said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    The complainant is not the appropriate person to make a determination of whether a breach of the law can be proven beyond reasonable doubt. That is the standard that must be met before the guilty can be fairly punished.

    "fairly punished" is doing a lot of work there

    If he is indeed guilty of rape, then fairly punished will mean jail time.

    But that is not the current point of debate.

    The complainant thinks the Tory party did nothing, when she informed them originally. She thinks they did nothing when the story was reported. She thinks they did nothing when the MP was questioned by Police.

    She is perhaps entitled to think they could have done more, at every stage.
    She wants him to be publicly named.

    That will lead to a lot of people thinking he is guilty of something regardless of any court process.

    That sort of damage to his reputation is unjust unless there is sufficient evidence to charge/convict
    Given the truly abysmal conviction rate for sexual offences I think she knows that it isn't going to get anywhere - so naming and shaming (resulting in other victims coming forward) is about as best as she can hope for.

    So what are his rights?
    Assuming he is guilty but there isn't enough evidence as its one person's word against another, what are the victims rights?

    And note, I'm not saying that he should be named, what I'm saying is that this isn't going to go anywhere because I suspect while in all likelihood the guilt is there,the evidence isn't.

    "while in all likelihood the guilt is there"

    How do you know this?

    Your reaction is why his name should not be made public.
    We can't know for certain in an individual case, but given the statistics it is either the case that there are vast numbers of women fabricating claims of rape, or there are vast numbers of rapists escaping justice.

    Which do you think it is?
    Probably both.
  • RH1992RH1992 Posts: 241
    MaxPB said:

    International virus news, Iran has covered up the true scale of virus deaths.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-53598965

    No surprise there then. People really need to stop using the worldometers website. It only uses officially provided data which from a lot of countries is extremely suspect even including first world nations like Spain let alone those like Iran and Russia.

    I find worldometers useful as a general guide as you can reorder the tables, but it's always in the back of my mind that many countries need an asterisk next to their figures. For those countries where there's misinformation or omissions, the rise in cases/deaths can still be scaled up where necessary to give a good idea of what's going on.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 304
    rkrkrk said:

    Nice article from David Spiegelhalter: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/02/uk-covid-19-excess-deaths

    It seems pretty conclusive that the UK has done very badly on COVID.
    I'm not sure I quite buy his, 'we won't know for years' answer. We can certainly debate the relative importance of particular mistakes, but some are clear.

    An earlier lockdown would have reduced deaths.
    Our protection of care homes has been lacking.

    Interesting though that our excess mortality was much more nationwide vs. the extreme highs seen in Italy and Spain in localized areas.

    One potential explanation he hints at is perhaps UK people are more likely to go to the infected areas in Spain/Italy than Spanish/Italian people from elsewhere in their respective countries. No idea if that's true or not.

    Not read this yet but the idea that we had a larger number of starting nuclei all over the country makes a lot of sense and has been going round for a while. Its less convenient for those who want all the blame to be on Boris, or on SAGE or whoever, but we may, to some extent, have just been unlucky. Its really interesting to me that parts of the UK, such as Scotland, NI and much of the SW of England have had very little Covid, almost certainly as a result of locking down 'early' compared with say London (i.e. early in the rapid increase of cases). This supports the idea that a full lockdown a week earlier would have saved lives, and possibly lots of lives. We were also looking in the wrong places for infection - mostly it wasn't visitors from China that was the issue, it was holiday makers coming back from Italy and Spain.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 27,583
    malcolmg said:

    Wonder if any former Tory minister's have deleted their twitter and facebook accounts over the weekend.

    There were a few with prominent social media photos of themselves watching (on TV) events from Wembley and Silverstone though!
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,602
    isam said:

    Charles said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    How did the Times know who she was?

    They reported her story last week, before the arrest.
    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?
    God I hope whoever the MP is is found not guilty. The desire to see him named, shamed and his life possibly ruined by people who have no idea whether he is guilty or not, and would normally perform miraculous contortions to say someone obviously guilty was innocent on a technicality, is a new low
    "I hope whoever the MP is is found not guilty" is a very dangerous wish.

    I hope that the alleged crime did not take place. If the crime did take place I hope that the MP is found guilty. If no crime took place, I hope that the investigation stops before it gets to court.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 21,858

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    How did the Times know who she was?

    They reported her story last week, before the arrest.
    I am getting more puzzled by this story the more I learn about it. Why did she go to the Chief Whip, the Leader of the House, the Times, and then the police? No. 4 should have been number one, and number 3 shouldn’t have figured at all.

    Somebody is at the very least being very, very badly advised here.
    There's definitely an uneasy feeling about it. One gets the impression that there's a big detail missing that changes the story completely.

    She comes across as wanting him shamed rather than allowing due legal process to take its course. Revenge, as opposed to justice. The MP's lawyer is certainly buying all the papers from today and yesterday.
    Sarah Keays?
    The Tory spokepersons on here are fair rattling on about this creeps honour this morning , must be a big shot right enough. Bit of panic setting in.
    I am far more concerned that some comments on here will cause concern for our moderators
    I doubt general commentary should concern anyone.

    However, the protestations on here about the innocence of someone they are supposed not to know the name of are odd.

    On that basis one can understand why women don't bother to report sexual assaults. The allusion down thread by some people, implies the accuser to be a "bunny boiler".

    If the Conservative Party are not revealing the name to protect the alleged victim, they should say so, and that is fine. It looks to all non- Conservative onlookers that the name remains secret to protect the accused. Another communications fail?
    I have not bothered to do it yet but I would suspect that given the information we already know it would not be beyond the wit of man to work out who it is likely to be. Not that I am advocating doing it on here though as it would get OGH into trouble.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,428
    edited August 3
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I would be very surprised if any competent experienced libel lawyer would give advice saying that the party “would” win such a case.

    This strikes me as another bit of myth-making by those weaving their Corbyn-was-betrayed story.

    Anyway I am sure Unite members would like to know why their money was wasted in Unite’s hopeless legal case against Anna Turley. What legal advice was given there and did Len and his chums follow it?
    I couldn’t remember which Union that was: that puts his statement in a whole new light.
    Indeed. McCluskey is a total hypocrite who couldn’t give two hoots about value for money for the union’s members.
    He’s also resisting all moves to replace him.

    For example, he expelled the last person who challenged him for election from Unite.

    And he’s now declared he’s staying until 2022 having previously said he would resign next year.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,692

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I certainly doubt they would be giving that advice on a "no win, no fee" basis!

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I certainly doubt they would be giving that advice on a "no win, no fee" basis!
    Oh dear! Agreeing again.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218
    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Any evidence for that statement? The rules were changed for all MPs sometime before the last election.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 1,224

    eek said:

    Charles said:

    eek said:

    Charles said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    The complainant is not the appropriate person to make a determination of whether a breach of the law can be proven beyond reasonable doubt. That is the standard that must be met before the guilty can be fairly punished.

    "fairly punished" is doing a lot of work there

    If he is indeed guilty of rape, then fairly punished will mean jail time.

    But that is not the current point of debate.

    The complainant thinks the Tory party did nothing, when she informed them originally. She thinks they did nothing when the story was reported. She thinks they did nothing when the MP was questioned by Police.

    She is perhaps entitled to think they could have done more, at every stage.
    She wants him to be publicly named.

    That will lead to a lot of people thinking he is guilty of something regardless of any court process.

    That sort of damage to his reputation is unjust unless there is sufficient evidence to charge/convict
    Given the truly abysmal conviction rate for sexual offences I think she knows that it isn't going to get anywhere - so naming and shaming (resulting in other victims coming forward) is about as best as she can hope for.

    So what are his rights?
    Assuming he is guilty but there isn't enough evidence as its one person's word against another, what are the victims rights?

    And note, I'm not saying that he should be named, what I'm saying is that this isn't going to go anywhere because I suspect while in all likelihood the guilt is there,the evidence isn't.

    "while in all likelihood the guilt is there"

    How do you know this?

    Your reaction is why his name should not be made public.
    We can't know for certain in an individual case, but given the statistics it is either the case that there are vast numbers of women fabricating claims of rape, or there are vast numbers of rapists escaping justice.

    Which do you think it is?
    I have no idea, but there is a reason footballers don't go out anymore.

    In this case why is the woman alleging the attack briefing the press?
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,602

    eek said:

    Charles said:

    eek said:

    Charles said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    The complainant is not the appropriate person to make a determination of whether a breach of the law can be proven beyond reasonable doubt. That is the standard that must be met before the guilty can be fairly punished.

    "fairly punished" is doing a lot of work there

    If he is indeed guilty of rape, then fairly punished will mean jail time.

    But that is not the current point of debate.

    The complainant thinks the Tory party did nothing, when she informed them originally. She thinks they did nothing when the story was reported. She thinks they did nothing when the MP was questioned by Police.

    She is perhaps entitled to think they could have done more, at every stage.
    She wants him to be publicly named.

    That will lead to a lot of people thinking he is guilty of something regardless of any court process.

    That sort of damage to his reputation is unjust unless there is sufficient evidence to charge/convict
    Given the truly abysmal conviction rate for sexual offences I think she knows that it isn't going to get anywhere - so naming and shaming (resulting in other victims coming forward) is about as best as she can hope for.

    So what are his rights?
    Assuming he is guilty but there isn't enough evidence as its one person's word against another, what are the victims rights?

    And note, I'm not saying that he should be named, what I'm saying is that this isn't going to go anywhere because I suspect while in all likelihood the guilt is there,the evidence isn't.

    "while in all likelihood the guilt is there"

    How do you know this?

    Your reaction is why his name should not be made public.
    We can't know for certain in an individual case, but given the statistics it is either the case that there are vast numbers of women fabricating claims of rape, or there are vast numbers of rapists escaping justice.

    Which do you think it is?
    Probably both.
    I do not for one moment believe "that there are *vast numbers* of women fabricating claims of rape"

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,428

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I certainly doubt they would be giving that advice on a "no win, no fee" basis!

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I certainly doubt they would be giving that advice on a "no win, no fee" basis!
    Oh dear! Agreeing again.
    This outburst of harmony goes against all PB’s principles.

    Couldn’t you find something important to argue about, such as the prospects for PR in British elections or the relative merits of pizza toppings?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 24,704
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I would be very surprised if any competent experienced libel lawyer would give advice saying that the party “would” win such a case.

    This strikes me as another bit of myth-making by those weaving their Corbyn-was-betrayed story.

    Anyway I am sure Unite members would like to know why their money was wasted in Unite’s hopeless legal case against Anna Turley. What legal advice was given there and did Len and his chums follow it?
    I couldn’t remember which Union that was: that puts his statement in a whole new light.
    Indeed. McCluskey is a total hypocrite who couldn’t give two hoots about value for money for the union’s members.
    He’s also resisting all moves to replace him.

    For example, he expelled the last person who challenged him for election from Unite.

    And he’s now declared he’s staying until 2022 having previously said he would resign next year.
    I hope he stays for ever. Every time he opens his mouth about Labour and the Left he reminds everyone else why they have to stay a million miles away from the Party.

    I will miss him on Pienaar spouting his bullshit with such apparent sincerity.

    Let's see how SKS handles him.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 6,755

    briefing the press?

    You mean "was asked to comment"...
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice article from David Spiegelhalter: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/02/uk-covid-19-excess-deaths

    It seems pretty conclusive that the UK has done very badly on COVID.
    I'm not sure I quite buy his, 'we won't know for years' answer. We can certainly debate the relative importance of particular mistakes, but some are clear.

    An earlier lockdown would have reduced deaths.
    Our protection of care homes has been lacking.

    Interesting though that our excess mortality was much more nationwide vs. the extreme highs seen in Italy and Spain in localized areas.

    One potential explanation he hints at is perhaps UK people are more likely to go to the infected areas in Spain/Italy than Spanish/Italian people from elsewhere in their respective countries. No idea if that's true or not.

    Not read this yet but the idea that we had a larger number of starting nuclei all over the country makes a lot of sense and has been going round for a while. Its less convenient for those who want all the blame to be on Boris, or on SAGE or whoever, but we may, to some extent, have just been unlucky. Its really interesting to me that parts of the UK, such as Scotland, NI and much of the SW of England have had very little Covid, almost certainly as a result of locking down 'early' compared with say London (i.e. early in the rapid increase of cases). This supports the idea that a full lockdown a week earlier would have saved lives, and possibly lots of lives. We were also looking in the wrong places for infection - mostly it wasn't visitors from China that was the issue, it was holiday makers coming back from Italy and Spain.
    The timing of the half-term holiday in most of England could not have been worse. Do Scotland, Wales, and NI have a holiday at the same time?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,428

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Any evidence for that statement? The rules were changed for all MPs sometime before the last election.
    The irony is that statement cannot be proved. Because by definition if an Opposition MP were interviewed in such a case and kept anonymous, most people wouldn’t know who it was.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,692
    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    Sir Cyril made a pretty good counterweight.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,692
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I certainly doubt they would be giving that advice on a "no win, no fee" basis!

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I certainly doubt they would be giving that advice on a "no win, no fee" basis!
    Oh dear! Agreeing again.
    This outburst of harmony goes against all PB’s principles.

    Couldn’t you find something important to argue about, such as the prospects for PR in British elections or the relative merits of pizza toppings?
    I suspect Mr T and I might agree on the prospects for PR, at least in the medium term, while disagreeing on the desirability.
    As to the merits of pizza toppings I'm normally against mixing sweet and sour, although I had some very tasty chicken with pineapple from the local Chinese takeaway recently.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,428

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    At risk of making all Liberals of that era sound like perverts, Clement Freud as well.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218
    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,692

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    Sir Cyril made a pretty good counterweight.
    Give me a fulcrum and a place to stand and I will move the world!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,692

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 1,224
    Scott_xP said:

    briefing the press?

    You mean "was asked to comment"...
    How did they get her contact details, from the Police?
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I certainly doubt they would be giving that advice on a "no win, no fee" basis!

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I certainly doubt they would be giving that advice on a "no win, no fee" basis!
    Oh dear! Agreeing again.
    This outburst of harmony goes against all PB’s principles.

    Couldn’t you find something important to argue about, such as the prospects for PR in British elections or the relative merits of pizza toppings?
    I suspect Mr T and I might agree on the prospects for PR, at least in the medium term, while disagreeing on the desirability.
    As to the merits of pizza toppings I'm normally against mixing sweet and sour, although I had some very tasty chicken with pineapple from the local Chinese takeaway recently.
    Not a fan of balsamic vinegar then?
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 1,757

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice article from David Spiegelhalter: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/02/uk-covid-19-excess-deaths

    It seems pretty conclusive that the UK has done very badly on COVID.
    I'm not sure I quite buy his, 'we won't know for years' answer. We can certainly debate the relative importance of particular mistakes, but some are clear.

    An earlier lockdown would have reduced deaths.
    Our protection of care homes has been lacking.

    Interesting though that our excess mortality was much more nationwide vs. the extreme highs seen in Italy and Spain in localized areas.

    One potential explanation he hints at is perhaps UK people are more likely to go to the infected areas in Spain/Italy than Spanish/Italian people from elsewhere in their respective countries. No idea if that's true or not.

    Not read this yet but the idea that we had a larger number of starting nuclei all over the country makes a lot of sense and has been going round for a while. Its less convenient for those who want all the blame to be on Boris, or on SAGE or whoever, but we may, to some extent, have just been unlucky. Its really interesting to me that parts of the UK, such as Scotland, NI and much of the SW of England have had very little Covid, almost certainly as a result of locking down 'early' compared with say London (i.e. early in the rapid increase of cases). This supports the idea that a full lockdown a week earlier would have saved lives, and possibly lots of lives. We were also looking in the wrong places for infection - mostly it wasn't visitors from China that was the issue, it was holiday makers coming back from Italy and Spain.
    The timing of the half-term holiday in most of England could not have been worse. Do Scotland, Wales, and NI have a holiday at the same time?
    In Scotland each local authority sets their own holidays.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 6,755

    How did they get her contact details

    They reported on her story last week, so I am guessing they had them on file...
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 21,858

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    Apparently not. He was asked not to attend the party conference just prior to the trial but was also asked by the local party to stand again in the 1979 election. He fought and lost the election as a Liberal just prior to the trial which had been postponed to 5 days after the election.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 1,224
    Scott_xP said:

    How did they get her contact details

    They reported on her story last week, so I am guessing they had them on file...
    So where did they get the story from?
  • eekeek Posts: 9,242
    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I would be very surprised if any competent experienced libel lawyer would give advice saying that the party “would” win such a case.

    This strikes me as another bit of myth-making by those weaving their Corbyn-was-betrayed story.

    Anyway I am sure Unite members would like to know why their money was wasted in Unite’s hopeless legal case against Anna Turley. What legal advice was given there and did Len and his chums follow it?
    I couldn’t remember which Union that was: that puts his statement in a whole new light.
    Indeed. McCluskey is a total hypocrite who couldn’t give two hoots about value for money for the union’s members.
    He’s also resisting all moves to replace him.

    For example, he expelled the last person who challenged him for election from Unite.

    And he’s now declared he’s staying until 2022 having previously said he would resign next year.
    I hope he stays for ever. Every time he opens his mouth about Labour and the Left he reminds everyone else why they have to stay a million miles away from the Party.

    I will miss him on Pienaar spouting his bullshit with such apparent sincerity.

    Let's see how SKS handles him.
    I didn't know McCluskey had cancelled his retirement after his anointed successor failed to get past the first hurdle.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,428

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    He didn’t however lose the whip while the enquiry was proceeding, or after being committed for trial. Indeed, he appeared at the Liberal Conference in 1978.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    Apparently not. He was asked not to attend the party conference just prior to the trial but was also asked by the local party to stand again in the 1979 election. He fought and lost the election as a Liberal just prior to the trial which had been postponed to 5 days after the election.
    Thanks for that.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,692

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice article from David Spiegelhalter: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/02/uk-covid-19-excess-deaths

    It seems pretty conclusive that the UK has done very badly on COVID.
    I'm not sure I quite buy his, 'we won't know for years' answer. We can certainly debate the relative importance of particular mistakes, but some are clear.

    An earlier lockdown would have reduced deaths.
    Our protection of care homes has been lacking.

    Interesting though that our excess mortality was much more nationwide vs. the extreme highs seen in Italy and Spain in localized areas.

    One potential explanation he hints at is perhaps UK people are more likely to go to the infected areas in Spain/Italy than Spanish/Italian people from elsewhere in their respective countries. No idea if that's true or not.

    Not read this yet but the idea that we had a larger number of starting nuclei all over the country makes a lot of sense and has been going round for a while. Its less convenient for those who want all the blame to be on Boris, or on SAGE or whoever, but we may, to some extent, have just been unlucky. Its really interesting to me that parts of the UK, such as Scotland, NI and much of the SW of England have had very little Covid, almost certainly as a result of locking down 'early' compared with say London (i.e. early in the rapid increase of cases). This supports the idea that a full lockdown a week earlier would have saved lives, and possibly lots of lives. We were also looking in the wrong places for infection - mostly it wasn't visitors from China that was the issue, it was holiday makers coming back from Italy and Spain.
    The timing of the half-term holiday in most of England could not have been worse. Do Scotland, Wales, and NI have a holiday at the same time?
    In Scotland each local authority sets their own holidays.
    Thanks. Would many of them have a week off at the critical time do you know?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,428

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I thought you meant Mrs Thatcher there for a moment!
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 10,741

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    I checked this the other day. I couldn't find any record of him losing the whip, or having it withdrawn etc.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218
    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,692

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I thought you meant Mrs Thatcher there for a moment!
    It's amazing what the summer heat can do to some people's imagination!
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 587

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Auberon Waugh stood for the Dog Lover's [sic] Party and garnered 79 votes. It's possible the grammatical solecism is down to Wiki rather than Bron, who was well-versed in such matters.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 13,986
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:
    If they’re the same people that advised him on Turley v Unite and Walker, which cost his members a cool £2 million paying the damages and costs for a very wealthy businessman, I would treat their advice with some caution.
    The cynic in me asks - "Would the lawyers advising that you could win in court, be the lawyers who, charging by the hour, would be conducting the case?"
    I would be very surprised if any competent experienced libel lawyer would give advice saying that the party “would” win such a case.

    This strikes me as another bit of myth-making by those weaving their Corbyn-was-betrayed story.

    Anyway I am sure Unite members would like to know why their money was wasted in Unite’s hopeless legal case against Anna Turley. What legal advice was given there and did Len and his chums follow it?
    I couldn’t remember which Union that was: that puts his statement in a whole new light.
    Indeed. McCluskey is a total hypocrite who couldn’t give two hoots about value for money for the union’s members.
    He’s also resisting all moves to replace him.

    For example, he expelled the last person who challenged him for election from Unite.

    And he’s now declared he’s staying until 2022 having previously said he would resign next year.
    Blokes do tend to cling on, don't they. Very rare for one to walk away from a big job unless there's a medical reason. It's why Kevin Keegan was such a breath of fresh air.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 587
    The singular most important element missing from the rapy Tory story is an anonymous wife standing before an anonymous constituency gate anonymously pledging to stand by the rotter. Young journos these days don't know the script.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Auberon Waugh stood for the Dog Lover's [sic] Party and garnered 79 votes. It's possible the grammatical solecism is down to Wiki rather than Bron, who was well-versed in such matters.
    Was it not the party of the Dog Lover then? Or are you implying there was more than one?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,428

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Well, yes, but I'm presuming that they weren't members of the Liberal Association!

    The one time I went to Barnstaple it was waterproof trains they hadn't quite got the hang of.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,428

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Auberon Waugh stood for the Dog Lover's [sic] Party and garnered 79 votes. It's possible the grammatical solecism is down to Wiki rather than Bron, who was well-versed in such matters.
    Was it not the party of the Dog Lover then? Or are you implying there was more than one?
    *Raises eyebrows*

    I know Thorpe was accused of sodomy, but it seems to be over-egging the pudding a bit to suggest that he was opposed by a candidate who practised bestiality.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 6,759

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    I told everyone in the Paleoproterozoic that all this Oxygen stuff was a dangerous idea...
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 1,757

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice article from David Spiegelhalter: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/02/uk-covid-19-excess-deaths

    It seems pretty conclusive that the UK has done very badly on COVID.
    I'm not sure I quite buy his, 'we won't know for years' answer. We can certainly debate the relative importance of particular mistakes, but some are clear.

    An earlier lockdown would have reduced deaths.
    Our protection of care homes has been lacking.

    Interesting though that our excess mortality was much more nationwide vs. the extreme highs seen in Italy and Spain in localized areas.

    One potential explanation he hints at is perhaps UK people are more likely to go to the infected areas in Spain/Italy than Spanish/Italian people from elsewhere in their respective countries. No idea if that's true or not.

    Not read this yet but the idea that we had a larger number of starting nuclei all over the country makes a lot of sense and has been going round for a while. Its less convenient for those who want all the blame to be on Boris, or on SAGE or whoever, but we may, to some extent, have just been unlucky. Its really interesting to me that parts of the UK, such as Scotland, NI and much of the SW of England have had very little Covid, almost certainly as a result of locking down 'early' compared with say London (i.e. early in the rapid increase of cases). This supports the idea that a full lockdown a week earlier would have saved lives, and possibly lots of lives. We were also looking in the wrong places for infection - mostly it wasn't visitors from China that was the issue, it was holiday makers coming back from Italy and Spain.
    The timing of the half-term holiday in most of England could not have been worse. Do Scotland, Wales, and NI have a holiday at the same time?
    In Scotland each local authority sets their own holidays.
    Thanks. Would many of them have a week off at the critical time do you know?
    Sorry, I can't remember. I have grandchildren at school in 2 different council areas, and another who works in a nursery school in a third.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Well, yes, but I'm presuming that they weren't members of the Liberal Association!

    The one time I went to Barnstaple it was waterproof trains they hadn't quite got the hang of.
    Travel in Devon is always a bit tricky once you get off the M5 (which stops at Exeter) or the main line through to Cornwall. I read an account of a family holiday where the fact that it took all day to drive from Tiverton to Woolacombe was regarded as perfectly normal.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Auberon Waugh stood for the Dog Lover's [sic] Party and garnered 79 votes. It's possible the grammatical solecism is down to Wiki rather than Bron, who was well-versed in such matters.
    Was it not the party of the Dog Lover then? Or are you implying there was more than one?
    *Raises eyebrows*

    I know Thorpe was accused of sodomy, but it seems to be over-egging the pudding a bit to suggest that he was opposed by a candidate who practised bestiality.
    Better that than lots of them as the original criticism of the grammar would suggest.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218


    rkrkrk said:

    Nice article from David Spiegelhalter: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/02/uk-covid-19-excess-deaths

    It seems pretty conclusive that the UK has done very badly on COVID.
    I'm not sure I quite buy his, 'we won't know for years' answer. We can certainly debate the relative importance of particular mistakes, but some are clear.

    An earlier lockdown would have reduced deaths.
    Our protection of care homes has been lacking.

    Interesting though that our excess mortality was much more nationwide vs. the extreme highs seen in Italy and Spain in localized areas.

    One potential explanation he hints at is perhaps UK people are more likely to go to the infected areas in Spain/Italy than Spanish/Italian people from elsewhere in their respective countries. No idea if that's true or not.

    Not read this yet but the idea that we had a larger number of starting nuclei all over the country makes a lot of sense and has been going round for a while. Its less convenient for those who want all the blame to be on Boris, or on SAGE or whoever, but we may, to some extent, have just been unlucky. Its really interesting to me that parts of the UK, such as Scotland, NI and much of the SW of England have had very little Covid, almost certainly as a result of locking down 'early' compared with say London (i.e. early in the rapid increase of cases). This supports the idea that a full lockdown a week earlier would have saved lives, and possibly lots of lives. We were also looking in the wrong places for infection - mostly it wasn't visitors from China that was the issue, it was holiday makers coming back from Italy and Spain.
    The timing of the half-term holiday in most of England could not have been worse. Do Scotland, Wales, and NI have a holiday at the same time?
    In Scotland each local authority sets their own holidays.
    Thanks. Would many of them have a week off at the critical time do you know?
    Sorry, I can't remember. I have grandchildren at school in 2 different council areas, and another who works in a nursery school in a third.
    That’s OK. I was just too lazy to look it up myself and wondered if you happened to know it off the top of your head.

    I must get out of the habit of trying to set people homework now that term has ended...
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 3,061
    Test
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    Test

    Match
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 35,146

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    Just a weekend paedo? Oh, that's alright then....

    Sheesh.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,428

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    I told everyone in the Paleoproterozoic that all this Oxygen stuff was a dangerous idea...
    Quite right. Everything's just gone more and more wrong since then.

    Should have stuck to water.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 6,231

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Well, yes, but I'm presuming that they weren't members of the Liberal Association!

    The one time I went to Barnstaple it was waterproof trains they hadn't quite got the hang of.
    Travel in Devon is always a bit tricky once you get off the M5 (which stops at Exeter) or the main line through to Cornwall. I read an account of a family holiday where the fact that it took all day to drive from Tiverton to Woolacombe was regarded as perfectly normal.
    I spent a year with a customer in Barnstaple. From wearside by train it always felt like I was travelling to the very end of the world. Nice place though Barnstaple even if in my mid 20s I was the youngest customer in the hotel by a good 3 decades.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 3,901

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Any evidence for that statement? The rules were changed for all MPs sometime before the last election.
    If this had been a Labour MP the Mail or Sun or Guido would have made it obvious who it was without outright naming them.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Auberon Waugh stood for the Dog Lover's [sic] Party and garnered 79 votes. It's possible the grammatical solecism is down to Wiki rather than Bron, who was well-versed in such matters.
    Was it not the party of the Dog Lover then? Or are you implying there was more than one?
    *Raises eyebrows*

    I know Thorpe was accused of sodomy, but it seems to be over-egging the pudding a bit to suggest that he was opposed by a candidate who practised bestiality.
    Better that than lots of them as the original criticism of the grammar would suggest.
    Also, don’t forget that in Devon “lover” can refer to someone whose relationship is no closer than standing aside so you could pass in the street.
  • I never knew Paul Scholes was a Muslim.

    Manchester United legend Paul Scholes spoken to by police over 'lockdown party in Oldham for son's birthday'

    Scholes was pictured wearing a 'Lockdown Live' t-shirt at the event said to be attended by dozens of youngsters

    https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/manchester-united-legend-paul-scholes-18705422
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Well, yes, but I'm presuming that they weren't members of the Liberal Association!

    The one time I went to Barnstaple it was waterproof trains they hadn't quite got the hang of.
    Travel in Devon is always a bit tricky once you get off the M5 (which stops at Exeter) or the main line through to Cornwall. I read an account of a family holiday where the fact that it took all day to drive from Tiverton to Woolacombe was regarded as perfectly normal.
    I spent a year with a customer in Barnstaple. From wearside by train it always felt like I was travelling to the very end of the world. Nice place though Barnstaple even if in my mid 20s I was the youngest customer in the hotel by a good 3 decades.
    Was it actually a year, or was it an afternoon that felt like a year?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,692

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    Just a weekend paedo? Oh, that's alright then....

    Sheesh.
    I've posted before that I lived in Rochdale when Smith was in the process of changing parties, and, because my in-laws lived there kept more-or-less in touch. Even though the local paper was somewhat on the prissy side there was never any suggestion whatsoever that, whatever political crimes he had committed, or indeed was committing, political was as far as any crimes went.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,428
    edited August 3
    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Any evidence for that statement? The rules were changed for all MPs sometime before the last election.
    If this had been a Labour MP the Mail or Sun or Guido would have made it obvious who it was without outright naming them.
    The irony is I know you're wrong on that - but I can't say more than that the MP in question was completely innocent, so I can't prove it.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 35,146

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    Just a weekend paedo? Oh, that's alright then....

    Sheesh.
    I've posted before that I lived in Rochdale when Smith was in the process of changing parties, and, because my in-laws lived there kept more-or-less in touch. Even though the local paper was somewhat on the prissy side there was never any suggestion whatsoever that, whatever political crimes he had committed, or indeed was committing, political was as far as any crimes went.
    Really?

    The opening para of his Wiki page:

    "Sir Cyril Smith MBE MStJ DL[1][2] (28 June 1928 – 3 September 2010) was a British Liberal Member of Parliament (MP) for Rochdale. After his death, numerous allegations of child sexual abuse by Smith emerged (including many made during his lifetime), leading the police to believe that Smith was a serial sex offender."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Smith
  • eekeek Posts: 9,242
    edited August 3

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Well, yes, but I'm presuming that they weren't members of the Liberal Association!

    The one time I went to Barnstaple it was waterproof trains they hadn't quite got the hang of.
    Travel in Devon is always a bit tricky once you get off the M5 (which stops at Exeter) or the main line through to Cornwall. I read an account of a family holiday where the fact that it took all day to drive from Tiverton to Woolacombe was regarded as perfectly normal.
    I spent a year with a customer in Barnstaple. From wearside by train it always felt like I was travelling to the very end of the world. Nice place though Barnstaple even if in my mid 20s I was the youngest customer in the hotel by a good 3 decades.
    I used to have to go to Kings Lynn for a customer - Peterborough to Kings Lynn took longer than the other half the journey and felt even longer than that as it was sooooooooooo slow...
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 6,231

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Well, yes, but I'm presuming that they weren't members of the Liberal Association!

    The one time I went to Barnstaple it was waterproof trains they hadn't quite got the hang of.
    Travel in Devon is always a bit tricky once you get off the M5 (which stops at Exeter) or the main line through to Cornwall. I read an account of a family holiday where the fact that it took all day to drive from Tiverton to Woolacombe was regarded as perfectly normal.
    I spent a year with a customer in Barnstaple. From wearside by train it always felt like I was travelling to the very end of the world. Nice place though Barnstaple even if in my mid 20s I was the youngest customer in the hotel by a good 3 decades.
    Was it actually a year, or was it an afternoon that felt like a year?
    Perhaps 8 or 9 trips in a 12 month period. I don't think time has any meaning in Barnstaple. OK so its not as bad as Peel on the Isle of Man (which was always deserted and resembling 1952 when I went) but still wierd.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218
    Test
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Well, yes, but I'm presuming that they weren't members of the Liberal Association!

    The one time I went to Barnstaple it was waterproof trains they hadn't quite got the hang of.
    Travel in Devon is always a bit tricky once you get off the M5 (which stops at Exeter) or the main line through to Cornwall. I read an account of a family holiday where the fact that it took all day to drive from Tiverton to Woolacombe was regarded as perfectly normal.
    I spent a year with a customer in Barnstaple. From wearside by train it always felt like I was travelling to the very end of the world. Nice place though Barnstaple even if in my mid 20s I was the youngest customer in the hotel by a good 3 decades.
    I used to have to go to Kings Lynn for a customer - Peterborough to Kings Lynn took longer than the other half the journey and felt even longer than that as it was sooooooooooo slow...
    If you go from London down to Penzance the Devon border is the half-way point in terms of time, if you are lucky. By train it’s more like Plymouth.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 304

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Well, yes, but I'm presuming that they weren't members of the Liberal Association!

    The one time I went to Barnstaple it was waterproof trains they hadn't quite got the hang of.
    Travel in Devon is always a bit tricky once you get off the M5 (which stops at Exeter) or the main line through to Cornwall. I read an account of a family holiday where the fact that it took all day to drive from Tiverton to Woolacombe was regarded as perfectly normal.
    Memory is a funny thing - childhood travels to North Devon (Lee Bay, near Ilfracombe) from West Wilts took all day. Can't be true. We do the same nowadays, across the moors for more fun and less traffic in 3 hours.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 35,146
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    I told everyone in the Paleoproterozoic that all this Oxygen stuff was a dangerous idea...
    Quite right. Everything's just gone more and more wrong since then.

    Should have stuck to water.
    We were happy as amoeba.....
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218
    Right, I’ve been putting off my daily walk for too long now.

    Later.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,428

    Test

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Well, yes, but I'm presuming that they weren't members of the Liberal Association!

    The one time I went to Barnstaple it was waterproof trains they hadn't quite got the hang of.
    Travel in Devon is always a bit tricky once you get off the M5 (which stops at Exeter) or the main line through to Cornwall. I read an account of a family holiday where the fact that it took all day to drive from Tiverton to Woolacombe was regarded as perfectly normal.
    I spent a year with a customer in Barnstaple. From wearside by train it always felt like I was travelling to the very end of the world. Nice place though Barnstaple even if in my mid 20s I was the youngest customer in the hotel by a good 3 decades.
    I used to have to go to Kings Lynn for a customer - Peterborough to Kings Lynn took longer than the other half the journey and felt even longer than that as it was sooooooooooo slow...
    If you go from London down to Penzance the Devon border is the half-way point in terms of time, if you are lucky. By train it’s more like Plymouth.
    Try London to Pwllheli by train. The halfway point in terms of time is Caersws.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,692

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    Just a weekend paedo? Oh, that's alright then....

    Sheesh.
    I've posted before that I lived in Rochdale when Smith was in the process of changing parties, and, because my in-laws lived there kept more-or-less in touch. Even though the local paper was somewhat on the prissy side there was never any suggestion whatsoever that, whatever political crimes he had committed, or indeed was committing, political was as far as any crimes went.
    Really?

    The opening para of his Wiki page:

    "Sir Cyril Smith MBE MStJ DL[1][2] (28 June 1928 – 3 September 2010) was a British Liberal Member of Parliament (MP) for Rochdale. After his death, numerous allegations of child sexual abuse by Smith emerged (including many made during his lifetime), leading the police to believe that Smith was a serial sex offender."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Smith
    I started visiting Rochdale 1960. Bro-in-law ......well, he was later ....... was in the Youth Band. Neither he nor his father said a word. Nothing whatsoever in the local paper. Friend taught at the place where Smith was alleged to have been 'carrying on'. Not a word. Not even a hint. And I was active in the Liberal party at the time.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 3,218

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Well, yes, but I'm presuming that they weren't members of the Liberal Association!

    The one time I went to Barnstaple it was waterproof trains they hadn't quite got the hang of.
    Travel in Devon is always a bit tricky once you get off the M5 (which stops at Exeter) or the main line through to Cornwall. I read an account of a family holiday where the fact that it took all day to drive from Tiverton to Woolacombe was regarded as perfectly normal.
    Memory is a funny thing - childhood travels to North Devon (Lee Bay, near Ilfracombe) from West Wilts took all day. Can't be true. We do the same nowadays, across the moors for more fun and less traffic in 3 hours.
    This was a diary from a holiday back in the fifties, including meals. The set off just after breakfast, stopped for lunch and got there just in time for supper.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 10,296

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    Just a weekend paedo? Oh, that's alright then....

    Sheesh.
    I've posted before that I lived in Rochdale when Smith was in the process of changing parties, and, because my in-laws lived there kept more-or-less in touch. Even though the local paper was somewhat on the prissy side there was never any suggestion whatsoever that, whatever political crimes he had committed, or indeed was committing, political was as far as any crimes went.
    Really?

    The opening para of his Wiki page:

    "Sir Cyril Smith MBE MStJ DL[1][2] (28 June 1928 – 3 September 2010) was a British Liberal Member of Parliament (MP) for Rochdale. After his death, numerous allegations of child sexual abuse by Smith emerged (including many made during his lifetime), leading the police to believe that Smith was a serial sex offender."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Smith
    I started visiting Rochdale 1960. Bro-in-law ......well, he was later ....... was in the Youth Band. Neither he nor his father said a word. Nothing whatsoever in the local paper. Friend taught at the place where Smith was alleged to have been 'carrying on'. Not a word. Not even a hint. And I was active in the Liberal party at the time.
    I shared a house in Reading with a guy from the NorthWest 1977 - 79.. He was an active Liberal and spoke openly about the rumours relating to Cyril Smith.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 1,757

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    Just a weekend paedo? Oh, that's alright then....

    Sheesh.
    I've posted before that I lived in Rochdale when Smith was in the process of changing parties, and, because my in-laws lived there kept more-or-less in touch. Even though the local paper was somewhat on the prissy side there was never any suggestion whatsoever that, whatever political crimes he had committed, or indeed was committing, political was as far as any crimes went.
    Really?

    The opening para of his Wiki page:

    "Sir Cyril Smith MBE MStJ DL[1][2] (28 June 1928 – 3 September 2010) was a British Liberal Member of Parliament (MP) for Rochdale. After his death, numerous allegations of child sexual abuse by Smith emerged (including many made during his lifetime), leading the police to believe that Smith was a serial sex offender."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Smith
    I started visiting Rochdale 1960. Bro-in-law ......well, he was later ....... was in the Youth Band. Neither he nor his father said a word. Nothing whatsoever in the local paper. Friend taught at the place where Smith was alleged to have been 'carrying on'. Not a word. Not even a hint. And I was active in the Liberal party at the time.
    Smith was in the Labour Party up to 1966.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 6,759

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    I told everyone in the Paleoproterozoic that all this Oxygen stuff was a dangerous idea...
    Quite right. Everything's just gone more and more wrong since then.

    Should have stuck to water.
    We were happy as amoeba.....
    {stage Yorkshire accent on}

    When it was just RNA, we was happy. We died fifteen times before breakfast. And breakfast wasn't invented yet. Or death. But we was happy pre-life....
  • GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 1,445

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    Just a weekend paedo? Oh, that's alright then....

    Sheesh.
    I've posted before that I lived in Rochdale when Smith was in the process of changing parties, and, because my in-laws lived there kept more-or-less in touch. Even though the local paper was somewhat on the prissy side there was never any suggestion whatsoever that, whatever political crimes he had committed, or indeed was committing, political was as far as any crimes went.
    Really?

    The opening para of his Wiki page:

    "Sir Cyril Smith MBE MStJ DL[1][2] (28 June 1928 – 3 September 2010) was a British Liberal Member of Parliament (MP) for Rochdale. After his death, numerous allegations of child sexual abuse by Smith emerged (including many made during his lifetime), leading the police to believe that Smith was a serial sex offender."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Smith
    I started visiting Rochdale 1960. Bro-in-law ......well, he was later ....... was in the Youth Band. Neither he nor his father said a word. Nothing whatsoever in the local paper. Friend taught at the place where Smith was alleged to have been 'carrying on'. Not a word. Not even a hint. And I was active in the Liberal party at the time.
    If it had been widely known in Rochdale then you wouldn't have expected him to keep winning the seat.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,692
    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    Just a weekend paedo? Oh, that's alright then....

    Sheesh.
    I've posted before that I lived in Rochdale when Smith was in the process of changing parties, and, because my in-laws lived there kept more-or-less in touch. Even though the local paper was somewhat on the prissy side there was never any suggestion whatsoever that, whatever political crimes he had committed, or indeed was committing, political was as far as any crimes went.
    Really?

    The opening para of his Wiki page:

    "Sir Cyril Smith MBE MStJ DL[1][2] (28 June 1928 – 3 September 2010) was a British Liberal Member of Parliament (MP) for Rochdale. After his death, numerous allegations of child sexual abuse by Smith emerged (including many made during his lifetime), leading the police to believe that Smith was a serial sex offender."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Smith
    I started visiting Rochdale 1960. Bro-in-law ......well, he was later ....... was in the Youth Band. Neither he nor his father said a word. Nothing whatsoever in the local paper. Friend taught at the place where Smith was alleged to have been 'carrying on'. Not a word. Not even a hint. And I was active in the Liberal party at the time.
    I shared a house in Reading with a guy from the NorthWest 1977 - 79.. He was an active Liberal and spoke openly about the rumours relating to Cyril Smith.
    Ah right. That was after me, so emerging in the early 70's maybe.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 35,146

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    I told everyone in the Paleoproterozoic that all this Oxygen stuff was a dangerous idea...
    Quite right. Everything's just gone more and more wrong since then.

    Should have stuck to water.
    We were happy as amoeba.....
    {stage Yorkshire accent on}

    When it was just RNA, we was happy. We died fifteen times before breakfast. And breakfast wasn't invented yet. Or death. But we was happy pre-life....
    We were happy as a pig in primordial soup, us....
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,398

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Speaking of MPs from other parties, can anyone remember if Jeremy Thorpe lost the whip while on trial for attempted murder? I was at primary school at the time and not following things that closely.

    He'd lost his seat before the trial started.
    Checking Wiki he was standing as a Liberal and I assume he had been charged by then as the trial was later that month.
    There was a move to get Mrs T to stand in his place....... compare Mrs Elphicke last December....... but it came to nothing.
    I am amazed that the North Devon Liberals wanted Mrs Thatcher as their candidate. Surely she was a tad right-wing for them?
    Have you been to North Devon? Some of the locals think that fire is a dangerous innovation.
    Well, yes, but I'm presuming that they weren't members of the Liberal Association!

    The one time I went to Barnstaple it was waterproof trains they hadn't quite got the hang of.
    Travel in Devon is always a bit tricky once you get off the M5 (which stops at Exeter) or the main line through to Cornwall. I read an account of a family holiday where the fact that it took all day to drive from Tiverton to Woolacombe was regarded as perfectly normal.
    Memory is a funny thing - childhood travels to North Devon (Lee Bay, near Ilfracombe) from West Wilts took all day. Can't be true. We do the same nowadays, across the moors for more fun and less traffic in 3 hours.
    This was a diary from a holiday back in the fifties, including meals. The set off just after breakfast, stopped for lunch and got there just in time for supper.
    Gorgeous area of the world once you're there though. Has anyone tried Tesla autopilot along some of the high hedge narrow roads there yet ?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 6,231
    News from the Foodservice sector and its not good. The new normal - the CMO saying we have probably reached the limits on opening up society - is going to be terminal for so many in the sector. Restaurant footfall still just 26.7% of normal, a lot of caterers and catering establishments and restaurants etc still not trading and no demand there to make them restart.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,398
    edited August 3

    News from the Foodservice sector and its not good. The new normal - the CMO saying we have probably reached the limits on opening up society - is going to be terminal for so many in the sector. Restaurant footfall still just 26.7% of normal, a lot of caterers and catering establishments and restaurants etc still not trading and no demand there to make them restart.

    My colleague reports Meadowhell (Not my idea of a day out, pandemic or not) absolubtely dead.

    Personally I think a special class of bankruptcy should be created for restaurant owners that want it, no disqualification as a director for 10 years and so forth - if it can be reasonably shown the virus has killed your business ability to operate.
    These are hopefully unique circumstances. that can disappear with a vaccine. The special bankruptcy should not be available after that.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 4,390
    edited August 3

    News from the Foodservice sector and its not good. The new normal - the CMO saying we have probably reached the limits on opening up society - is going to be terminal for so many in the sector. Restaurant footfall still just 26.7% of normal, a lot of caterers and catering establishments and restaurants etc still not trading and no demand there to make them restart.

    How are German restaurants doing? I remember hearing that reopening went well but has this continued or was there a one-off surge before falling back? Are their any lessons we can draw from across the North Sea?

    ETA of course Rishi's Eat Out to Help Out scheme begins today so perhaps that will kickstart a recovery.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 35,651

    News from the Foodservice sector and its not good. The new normal - the CMO saying we have probably reached the limits on opening up society - is going to be terminal for so many in the sector. Restaurant footfall still just 26.7% of normal, a lot of caterers and catering establishments and restaurants etc still not trading and no demand there to make them restart.

    If Johnson does another major lockdown or insists over 50s go into shielding for months over the winter, then we are heading for 1930s again imho. Possibly even worse.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 5,493
    Pulpstar said:



    Gorgeous area of the world once you're there though. Has anyone tried Tesla autopilot along some of the high hedge narrow roads there yet ?

    Once a sufficient number of Teslas have driven them (whether in AP or not) Tesla's Cloud/AI thing will have harvested enough data to make those roads work on AP.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,692

    OllyT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So Soft Barely Brexit at all Ruth is back to lead the party into the election where the prospectus is All Hard Brexit All the Time?

    It's a strategy I suppose.
    The strategy is to get a Unionist majority at Holyrood next year and includes the pro Brexit Tories, soft Brexit Labour and even the anti Brexit LDs and George Galloway in the stop the SNP tent
    I was fine with the idea of troops in the street and arresting Sturgeon to keep Scotland part of the Union.

    But working with George Galloway to do so marks you out as the lowest of the low.

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Charles said:

    Why is it right that this MP should be publicly shamed before the police have determined whether there is sufficient evidence to charge him?

    I don't know that it is right, but the complainant feels that yet again the Tory party have taken no action, and she is presumably in no doubt at to his guilt
    The feelings of complainants cannot be paramount when seeking justice. We've seen what happens when investigation is treated as though its therapy for people who have been or are alleged to be victims of crime.

    I very much hope if the complainant is truthful that her attacker gets a long prison sentence, but not suspending someone who is not even charged yet I find very hard to criticise even though of course the complainant is upset.
    No, this will not do. For a start, he'd still be an MP even if the whip were withdrawn.

    Second, the victim certainly knows who he is, so anyone claiming here that she is out for revenge must explain why she, the victim, has not publicly named him.

    Third, it would be quite normal for the police to be the last resort after party and parliamentary authorities. Many rapes are not reported at all.

    Fourth, the whip could have been withdrawn without fanfare when the complaints were first made. It is only now that this would be front-page news.

    Fifth, the question of accused men's rights to anonymity comes up from time to time: see the Salmond, Cliff Richard and many other high-profile cases. The government should address this issue directly and not make one of its own MPs a special case.
    To take two of your points: publicly accusing someone of rape who has not already been charged is a quick route to court and a massive libel claim so I’d be amazed if she did.

    On your last point, the commons has made all its MPs a special case if I’m reading this correctly:

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parliament-votes-keep-mps-arrests-7347827
    Which is also, candidly, unacceptable.

    I’m quite happy with the principle of a defendant’s anonymity. I can see the logic for naming after charge.

    What isn’t good enough is saying it’s one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us.
    It's more like one rule for Tory MPs. If this had been a Labour, Lib Dem. SNP MP involved we would know who it was by now.
    Lately possibly. As a counterweight, I offer Sir Cyril Smith, although I do suspect he wasn't as much of a sinner as is sometimes alleged.
    Just a weekend paedo? Oh, that's alright then....

    Sheesh.
    I've posted before that I lived in Rochdale when Smith was in the process of changing parties, and, because my in-laws lived there kept more-or-less in touch. Even though the local paper was somewhat on the prissy side there was never any suggestion whatsoever that, whatever political crimes he had committed, or indeed was committing, political was as far as any crimes went.
    Really?

    The opening para of his Wiki page:

    "Sir Cyril Smith MBE MStJ DL[1][2] (28 June 1928 – 3 September 2010) was a British Liberal Member of Parliament (MP) for Rochdale. After his death, numerous allegations of child sexual abuse by Smith emerged (including many made during his lifetime), leading the police to believe that Smith was a serial sex offender."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Smith
    I started visiting Rochdale 1960. Bro-in-law ......well, he was later ....... was in the Youth Band. Neither he nor his father said a word. Nothing whatsoever in the local paper. Friend taught at the place where Smith was alleged to have been 'carrying on'. Not a word. Not even a hint. And I was active in the Liberal party at the time.
    If it had been widely known in Rochdale then you wouldn't have expected him to keep winning the seat.
    Just looked at the figures. His vote was consistently (apart from Feb 74) in the low 40% rage, round about 22,000.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 4,390
    It is only a fortnight since Julian Lewis had the whip withdrawn. Of course, he was accused of something far more serious than rape -- of frustrating Boris & Cummings in order to save the nation from Chris Grayling. To be fair, my memory is that most pb Tories were critical of that withdrawal too.
  • Hi All, hope you're well
  • eekeek Posts: 9,242

    News from the Foodservice sector and its not good. The new normal - the CMO saying we have probably reached the limits on opening up society - is going to be terminal for so many in the sector. Restaurant footfall still just 26.7% of normal, a lot of caterers and catering establishments and restaurants etc still not trading and no demand there to make them restart.

    How are German restaurants doing? I remember hearing that reopening went well but has this continued or was there a one-off surge before falling back? Are their any lessons we can draw from across the North Sea?

    ETA of course Rishi's Eat Out to Help Out scheme begins today so perhaps that will kickstart a recovery.
    I suspect August will be bumper takings and September will be a nightmare...
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 16,376
    Dura_Ace said:

    Pulpstar said:



    Gorgeous area of the world once you're there though. Has anyone tried Tesla autopilot along some of the high hedge narrow roads there yet ?

    Once a sufficient number of Teslas have driven them (whether in AP or not) Tesla's Cloud/AI thing will have harvested enough data to make those roads work on AP.
    Absolutely not
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,398
    On topic

    If shocks aren't wanted, surely Kamala Harris is the best choice ?
    Her background has been run through already when she was favourite in the Dem horse race.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 15,012
    House prices may collapse, banks may get nationalised and private pensions may fold, but people will not go hungry.
This discussion has been closed.