That's right, led astray by some wanton hussy no doubt, just proves a woman's place is in the wrong. There can't be that many women with poor taste surely?Easily led astray, is that why he has so many children?
The magistrate explained the reason to me, he still put me on the S.O register thoughThat's right, led astray by some wanton hussy no doubt, just proves a woman's place is in the wrong. There can't be that many women with poor taste surely?
There's a reason for a zip on your trousers boys. . . .
And so it begins, or ends, move on, nothing to see !
Politics live: Boris Johnson receives questionnaire from Met Police about lockdown-breaking partiesnews.sky.com
More lies from our serial liar.
This is the opinion of someone (not me) with a legal background regarding so-called Partygate......
1. It's a really odd scenario.
The photos/email evidence re gatherings is unlikely to be admissible because:
a) Illegally obtained, and
b) They've been altered by cropping, pixelating or blanking out names.
2. The gatherer of the evidence is required to explain the evidence, how obtained, disclose originals & any supporting documentation which may change how the evidence is perceived prior to the 'cherry picking'.
3. Then there's the potential offences committed in obtaining & publishing the evidence.
As a lawyer advising, I'd be pushing for questioning of those who disclosed the illegally obtained evidence, as there's no public interest defence available.
4. Who, what, when, where, how? Unlikely to get answers but then it opens up the dialogue to the potential offences under:
RIPA (public servant/officials/body),
Official Secrets Act & a whole myriad of data protection & human rights provisions.
& breaches of Codes of Conduct.
5. Fixed penalty fine(s) for those found to be in breach of Covid Regulations.
Potential jail sentences for those who obtained & published evidence illegally obtained.
6. Will the Met investigation focus entirely on the gatherings & merely perform a box ticking exercise, or will it look to the illegally obtained evidence & the investigation will become something more serious?
7. Those who've gathered & published evidence in theory face stiffer sentences that those who may have breached Covid Regulations.
Discounting illegally obtained evidence leaves very little for the Police to go on & it's what they're obliged to do in law, but the mob are baying.
8. Politically, is it better to accept a fine for maybe 1 breach just to draw a line under it (although unlikely to satisfy the media), or to turn it into a far reaching investigation with serious implications for those involved?
9. Personally, I'd go for the latter. Leaking confidential information is serious. The unscrupulous or skint can find themselves tempted to disclose information to less benign individuals than the media. Passwords, details of room layouts, security set ups...
10. As events unfold in Eastern Europe, the notion that leaking photographs of protected areas of government premises is just fodder for the Press is less persuasive. It becomes something more serious that cannot be overlooked.
11. Also worth noting the anomaly re Cummings.
He escaped a fixed penalty notice following Barnard Castle due to lapse of time.
He now seems to be offering evidence in the hope those who protected him are culpable of the same offence.