Jump to content

Rebekah Brooks cleared, Andy Coulson found guilty........


Recommended Posts

The jury took days to come to their conclusion (I think I read earlier that they'd gone out on the 11th). So I suspect (not that I am any kind of legal expert) that her lawer managed to slip in some sort of "reasonable doubt" issue whereby they all knew she was guilty as sin, but they were forced to find her not guilty.


Of course I have absolutely no proof of that whatsoever, but will be interested to read more detail about the case, as I wasn't floowing that closely (I'd just assumed they'd both get done).

I?m with the ?we might not like it, but the alternative to the system we have is even worse?


We all have a pop at Sue on here when without access to ALL the evidence or sitting in on all the trials she condemns the McCanns. Same thing here. We weren?t there so it?s not on us to make the judgment and say teh jury got it wrong


But what DC says is correct ? if we take hee by her own words, the world?s most inept editor

Pure speculation, but I can imagine a jury feeling sympathetic to the PA/security guard/husband, and where the charge is conspiracy it's difficult to convict one and acquit the rest.


This is one of the few cases where there was a lot of reporting of the detail of the evidence and I thought the case against all of them was strong, but they came up with a positive story as to why they weren't guilty and (for whatever reason) the jury accepted it.


Acquittals won't have much/any impact on the civil cases which are against News International and are mostly being settled as far as I can see.

No journos came forward to testify against her like they did Coulson - all hearsay really even though most probably true.


Now the judge has directed the jury to use majority vote Coulson could also be done for misconduct in public office and the police who sold stories got a couple of years for that so it's all adding up.

DaveR, didn't really understand the end of your first sentence, if a charge is conspiracy then it must be impossibble, not difficult, to convict only one, otherwise where is the conspiracy? Anyway, agree with what you say and also Otta's post about legal arquement etc. Perhaps we really have got to the position in our society now, whereby "There's no justice in this country, only the law". Worth thinking about.

You are right that conspiracy requires more than one, but not all conspirators have to be defendants. As I understand it, the conspiracy to pervert the course of justice was limited to the defendants, and as a matter of fact there either was a plot or there wasn't, so logically all in or all out. The conspiracies to hack phones & pay off various public servants included others not in the dock, so possible for one defendant to be convicted.


"Perhaps we really have got to the position in our society now, whereby "There's no justice in this country, only the law"."


Not sure how apt that is for this case; it was all about the facts, and the defendants came up with a good enough story.

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We all have a pop at Sue on here when without

> access to ALL the evidence or sitting in on all

> the trials she condemns the McCanns.


xxxxxx


I have always made it quite clear that my views on the McCanns are based solely on what information is in the Portuguese police files in the public domain, and that my view could change if I was privy to evidence which is not presently in the public domain.


And I don't know what "trials" you are referring to?

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Does Andy Coulson still have a house in East

> > Dulwich?

>

>

> He was a near neighbour of mine. He moved last

> summer. Glad that @#$%& got found guilty.


He moved from a house on Wood Vale at least two years ago. That's the house the press photographed him leaving from each day when the allegations broke.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Because they have been awful - scoring own-goal after own-goal. You cannot be an apologist for their diabolical first 100 days on the basis that the previous lot were worse - in the same way the whole of the 14 years of Tory rule was tarred with the brush of despair about their very worst behaviour in the latter years Labour run the risk of their government being tarred with the same brush on the basis of their first 100 days. It has probably been some of the worst 100 days of any new government and Starmer's approval ratings aren't as low as they are without reason. You know they are in trouble when MPs start posting the good bits from their first 100 days - it's a sure sign they know they have a problem. And when this government have a problem the frontbenchers disappear from media interviews and they roll-out the likes of Pat McFadden to provide some air cover. Yesterday it was farmers. Today it is the pensioners being pushed into poverty by Winter Fuel payments. It's a perceptual disaster and has been since day 1 - they have to get a grip on it else this leadership team is doomed. You highlight the very problem here. Farmers are not being gifted money. They are being gifted assets. Assets that they don't realise as they continue to work those assets to provide food for the country. Most inheritance is cash or an asset (a house) that people sell to generate cash. Passing a farm to younger family members is very different. On the news they interviewed a farmer whose family had owned the farm since 1822 and he broke down in tears when he spoke about his 13 year old son who was working in the farm to continue it - no doubt in the realisation that his son would be hit by a tax bill when he took it over. Given farmers are not cash rich then the decision would likely be that they would need to sell some of the land that generations had worked hard to build to fund the tax bill - and so many farms are on a knife's edge that it might be enough to send them over the edge.   There are many valid reasons why the government are doing what they are doing but those reasons are not cutting through and they are losing control of the narrative. That is a massive issue for them.  
    • Another great job by Simmonds Plastering. This time he decorated the newly plastered living room and added a pantry cupboard in kitchen.  He is reliable and works really hard.  Highly recommend 07949 180 533
    • Because land has been exempt from inheritance tax wealthy individuals (like Clarkson and Dyson) have used it as a tax avoidance measure. Clarkson is on the record stating that he bought land for precisely this purpose. It is people like him who farmers should be angry with, if anyone, because they have exploited a loophole, which is now being (partially) closed. Yes, I do grasp the concept of inheritance - it's were one is given money, or valuable assets by chance of birth (having done nothing to earn it). As money you have earned, is taxed, it seems odd that money you have not, shouldn't be. I assume you don't disapprove of income tax? Why do you think people coming into a massive, unearned windfall shouldn't pay tax, but a nurse who works hard for everything they earn, should? Everyone has to pay inheritance tax over a certain threshold. In my opinion, if you are fortunate enough to be gifted any amount of money (whether cash, or a valuable asset), to quibble about paying some tax on some of it, seems rather entitled. Most farms worth under £3m will still end up being passed on tax free. Those that do have to a pay inheritance tax will do so at just 20% on that part of it that is over the threshold (rather than the standard 40%), and they'll have 10 years to do so (usually it is payable immediately). So it is still preferential terms for those being gifted a multimillion pound estate. 
    • Ah yes, good spot! Thanks for the link. It sounds like they are planning a licensed restaurant with a small bar from reading through the application. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...