Making the news today....

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

15 hours ago, eggsarascal said:

Isn't it funny when the boots on the other foot.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/dec/27/its-completely-wrong-falsely-accused-tory-mp-attacks-legal-aid-cuts

 

This tw@t was one of the big hitters in getting legal aid almost done away with. Now he's had a >£100k legal bill, with no way of getting his money back, (even though he's innocent) he doesn't like it.

He wasn’t found guilty ??s. 

 

Im not so sure that naturally equates to “innocent” however, just that there was insufficient evidence to satisfy the “beyond reasonable doubt.”

[eggsarascal]

24 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

He wasn’t found guilty ??s. 

 

Im not so sure that naturally equates to “innocent” however, just that there was insufficient evidence to satisfy the “beyond reasonable doubt.”

You knew what I meant.

 

Anyway he ain't getting his money back.

[Stubby]

Hot off the presses ....Vesp back for a couple of days and already going to compile a list of whats wrong with this site and send it to Steve?

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

4 hours ago, eggsarascal said:

You knew what I meant.

 

Anyway he ain't getting his money back.

Yes mucker, I do know what yome mean, I wasn’t contesting the irony of someone who voted for legal aid reduction then having to dig deep to defend their liberty. 

 

Like so many ‘systems’, there is always the potential for exploitation - Yam Yam Choudry for example. 

 

Maybe he’ll put a bit more effort into researching his voting tendencies in the future (and maybe be a bit more careful in his seduction techniques)

 

I was just saying, there’s a subtle difference between being ‘innocent’ and being found ‘not guilty’ or acquitted. 

 

 

[Ratman]

Hot off the presses ....Vesp back for a couple of days and already going to compile a list of whats wrong with this site and send it to Steve[emoji16]

Crikey...... how longs his fictional list? Thought he would of popped up by now ?

[felixthelogchopper]

33 minutes ago, Ratman said:

Crikey...... how longs his fictional list? Thought he would of popped up by now ?

Maybe he's back on the naughty step again?

[Ratman]

Nah!.... he knows to much advanced rope trickery to become stranded on that there step, he’d of zip-lined his over knowledgable ass straight off back to his little save haven of alcatraz island [emoji849][emoji23]

[Mark J]

[Mull]

Why are the extra 1050 on the street not using food banks, are they too rich for that?

[Mark J]

10 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

He wasn’t found guilty ??s. 

 

Im not so sure that naturally equates to “innocent” however, just that there was insufficient evidence to satisfy the “beyond reasonable doubt.”

There is such a thing as 'No Further Action' (NFA). Which is to say that that it is either: 1) Not in the public interest to charge the individual or 2) There is insufficient evidence to proceed with the charge.

If you do have an NFA on your record, which is tantamount to an ongoing enquiry when it comes to applying for visas for far away places, then you have to get the police to change the 'NFA' record to 'No Crime'.  Which isn't the easiest of things to  do, no-one likes to admit when they're wrong.