14 hours of deliberations later and Mr Justice Sweeney has agreed to accept a majority verdict on which at least ten agree. He is giving answers to ten pretty extraordinary questions the jury asked him yesterday.
Getting closer…
Secret of Farage’s Success | Prospect
It Was Beeb Not Tabloids That Smeared Help For Heroes | Speccie
Alternatives to Business For Britain Are Muppets | Charlie Mullins
Obama Counsel Knew of IRS Claims Weeks Ago | WSJ
Bunga Bunga Trial: Dancing Girls, Nuns, Nurses & Obama | Reuters
Dave Must Learn From Conan the Barbarian | James Kirkup
Tory Infighting Will Let Miliband In | The Commentator
Real Swivel-Eyed Loons Are in Number Ten | Telegraph
Bozier Accepts Caution | Political Scrapbook
Getting to Know U-KIP | ConservativeHome
Farage Telegraph Advert | Political Scrapbook
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Tom Harris bemoans the public’s attitude to politicians…
“Mr Oborne echoes the lazy, anti-politics whine we hear so often these days, all based on the absurd notion that politicians were once loved and only fell out of public favour during the expenses scandal. He should take a walk to the Strangers’ Bar. But not to sup with the patrons he seems to despise so much, dearie me, no; he should instead look at the paintings on the corridor outside the bar, which depict the devastating fire which consumed most of the Palace in 1834. And he should reflect on the fact that on that dramatic night, as the Commons went up in flames, a crowd gathered on the South Bank to clap and cheer.”
” Evans, dear boy, Evans “
Hang the fucker! Ooh, I just had a premonition of my future when the sheeple wake up!
8 women, 4 men and they expect them to agree!!!
The women just need to flash their tits at the men and job done.
One flash from Carina’s gonads and they will all be off.
Who cares about the Vicky verdict? Chris has been in limbo for long enough and it’s time for him to visit the B wing showers.
hehehehhe
YES DEAR!
Now lget your bra on, make me some tea and lets send this bitch to prison!
I hope that windmill boy gets 4 years
Personally Id hang him
MYSELF!
Hung like a Huhne?
I suppose his bit on the side is only used to the “wee man in the canoe”.
“Huhne is remarkable, he appeared to be a nerveless vicar, one of those people who was never burdened by self-doubt and who could take on all-comers,” Mr Gove said.
“Now people will remember him only for the fall; from having been a few places away from being Deputy Prime Minister to suddenly being in Brixton nick.”
was he fuck a few steps away from being Deputy PM
he was a few steps away from being a shagging Geography teacher
Aargh ! Mind-bleach, quick !
Huhne as deputy PM ? That would have been almost as bad as the one-eyed mong.
The dagger was poised just between Cleggy’s shoulder blades. HE was simply too slow.
Did the jury ask why Huhne left his wife for Jack Douglas from the Carry On films?
A result by lunchtime then.
‘Not Guilty’
‘Guilty’
50/50 if you ask me
“Take him down”……..well fckn hope so anyway.
you shall be hanged by the neck . . .
appealing, drawing attention
Synonyms: adorable, agreeable, alluring, beautiful, beckoning, bewitching, captivating, charming, comely, enchanting, engaging, enthralling, enticing, fair, fascinating, fetching, glamorous, good-looking, gorgeous, handsome, hunky, interesting, inviting, looker, lovely, luring, magnetic, mesmeric, pleasant, pleasing, prepossessing, pretty, provocative, seductive, stunning, taking, tantalizing, teasing, tempting, winning, winsome
Perm any 8.
Not me then ?
Justice would have been served at a more cost effective rate long ago if the accused were not millionaire members of the political elite.
Yeah -amazing what (expensive) lengths some people will go to just to save 60 quid on a speeding fine.
I couldn’t get it through on expenses.
I hope Huhne has the copy of Al Gores “Our Purpose” Al’s Nobel lecture acceptance speech booklet which I gave him. Huhne might want to have it as reading material. He ‘accepted’ a copy of it in December 2010 and then sped off on a carbon footprint trip to NY.
If it takes Huhne 10 years to own up / be found out; at this rate he will work out that global warming / climate change is a big myth by say 2020.
Sadly, that is probably true. But we tolerate it …
So what are the 10 questions?
Shes going to get off this will give great heart to McShame,she kenw what she was doing and that it was illegal,she just couldnt handle Huhne leaving her so she has come up with this shit excuse marital coercion,the political class are corrupt
You never just did what the other half wanted, knowing it was wrong or against what you thought or believed, just to keep them quiet or so you don’t get a hard time?
Happens to me fairly often, only it comes from my kids!!!
so you are the problem
Not pre-judging anything Your Honour, but if he does go down, would it be possible to save public money by arranging for her to have a double cell with McShame. They seem to be a couple that deserve each other
She not he
He’s not fussed either way
Hung Jury! Retrial….
Why does Rachel Reeves’ quote of the day show she should not be given the Education brief? Seems sensible to me.
Think you’re being unfair.
There’s been fog on the Thames. She had to rush out some statement or other so she could get down to her other job in maritime protection.
This woman is highly qualified ….. to bust the country again….
Wiki
“Between 2006 and July 2009, she worked as a business planner and analyst for Halifax Bank of Scotland”
Says it all really….
Not to speak of her husband
Wiki
“Nicholas Beverley Joicey (born 11 May 1970) is the director of the International Department at HM Treasury. He previously worked as private secretary and speech writer to United Kingdom chancellor Gordon Brown and as a journalist at The Observer newspaper.”
An intimate member of the Maximum Imbecile’s staff…when he was “booming and busting” the country…
God help us…
A power couple indeed….
And a perfeect illustration of all that has been and continues to be disastrous in this country
woy cant she tokk pwoperly
Worked with Balls ?
So, he’s a Senior Civil Servant at the Treasury, married to a Labour Shadow Minister? That can’t be right, surely?
That smells very fishy.
It took a while for the majority direction. Judge can issue that after two hours of deliberations have passed.
This may yet still result in a hung jury.
The real question is, if hung, will a retrial be pursued ?
Against one defendant, I presume you pose your question?
We can hang the jury for failing to reach the right verdict.
Not a lot of people have woken up to that yet.
Has to be said that this jury is about as thick as a 10ft concrete wall!
Instead of prosecuting some second rate economist for a petty offence
Why not prosecute some bankers for multiple decade long criminality which has left us all in the stuck…?
‘cos they are friends of Dave .. Chris .. Gordon .. etc
Can we bring a private prosecution against the Director of Public Prosecutions for dereliction of duty?
Or refusal to prosecute known criminals?
He’s still very, very busy thinking about and looking possibly for a way out of the collapsed trial last year at Swansea The £30 million beanfeast for the legal fraternity where the innocents fitted up and impriosned years ago. Those fitted up wer to have had their day. Files went supposedly missing at one point / the judge then halted the trial – but then the files were suddenly found in the possession of the SWP. Do the CPS cover up to protect bent plod for liability purposes / do they have a common purpose?
The question is “did she take the points illegally”, not difficult, my opinion of jurors is not getting better.
They are looking at whether she took those points illegally under marital coercion. If they find coercion, then she is to be found not guilty of the illegal action.
From Huhnes plea, we know that she is guilty of taking the points illegally.
Looking ahead, the jury questions etc., especially one which should not have been revealed yesterday, certainly make any future appeal case much more interesting.
She was not under any threat, she did it for her own self interest, marital coercion does not come into it. The defence has put up a good smoke screen.
We hope she gets off. We’ve got shitloads of work lined up for her plus guest host on HIGNFY.
If any of you have ever does jury service you will know that there are always a couple of lefty mongs who bring up politics.
I had some fucking teacher who wouldn’t convict a muslim woman even though she was bangs to rights simply because she was Muslim. The fact he taught our kids was what really worried me.
She still went down on a majority verdict.
“even though she was bangs to rights simply because she was Muslim.”
LOL
+1000
I did a horrific child abuse case, even his brief thought he was guilty and one woman thought he had done it by accident. The only good thing was that the 3 other women on the jury were ready to lynch her.
Took us 7 hours but got ther in the end
How did those ten pretty extraordinary questions get into the domain of public knowledge?
I saw a Tweet but it did not mention them.
The ten pillars of wisdom
What were the ten questions?
Exactly what I was about to post!
And will the answers be cast in stone ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21521460
Meanwhile the worthies on the Chilcot enquiry continue to shred the evidence which we now all know
Have they no shame?
this jury are a bunch of idiots
You won’t be saying that when you agree with their verdict
even if i agree they are idiots for taking this long
I would savour the moment
Mr Justice Sweeney: I have received a total of 10 questions from you. A number of these questions raise fundamental issues which are all dealt with in my written directions, but nevertheless are going to require individual answers.
In other words, it looks as if the jury are all mongs.
more likely the judge’s direction was couched in terms dickens would have flinched at.
Hence the what does this mean . . . 10 questions
From what I’ve heard, he appears to have been a model of clarity, save perhaps to those who have just arrived from Gujarat.
and what have you heard of the ten questions oh great luminary?
Dealt with but were they answered?
I remember my Jury Service a £250,000 waste of taxpayers money on a case that should have been dealt with by Magistrates the following day instead of over a year later in a Crown Court after all but one of the witnesses had left the Country.
How much will this one have cost? And who will have paid?
The jury cannot be questioned. If they were as you say, the judge would discharge some or all of them.
This 3 day trial had 3 days of summing up. The jury were given some fairly weighty bundles as well to consider. Likely a 2 inch thick binder of everything.
The judge’s direction on burden of proof is also confusing. Absent obvious duress being placed on the defendant, direction that the burden is on the prosecution is not in line with martial coercion case law. That may have been behind some of the questions raised.
That they are deliberating for so long is not an indication of low intelligence, but does reflect some of the complexities of this case for them.
They are not deciding her guilt of the charge, but whether her guilt is excusable.
That should have been ‘marital coercion’ case law, not ‘martial coercion’.
Are you quite sure!
I expect there is a decent menu for jurers these days at the Old Bailey
dear sygnet
how about a verdict of NOT UNPROVEN?
Because this is not a Scottish court.
and if it was (a Scottish Court), the verdict could be ‘Not Proven’.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_proven
that was part of the joke!
Jackie Chan is Chinese, so not surprising it went waaayyy over his head.
OH Lor p lease have them both locked up !
And if you could also sort out the numpty that apologises for something that happened in 1919 whilst still killing children in far away lands we would all be grateful
I’d like to hear apologies from the Scandanavians for the Viking invasion and the French for the Norman invasion.
They weren’t invaders, no, they were migrant workers seeking a better life for themselves doing jobs our lazy teenage Icenii thought they were too good for.
one plus from this is that Huhne is experiencing so many false dawns
as soon as Pryce is dealt with then Huhne will be brought back to Court (with his suitcase) for sentencing – 2-3 years at her Majesty’s pleasure will do nicely please.
Talking of evil landlords, who will look after his massive property portfolio whilst he is bending over in Brixton nick ?
Six months at the most I reckon.
I do not know if she is guilty but I sure hope she it.
This page will have to explode at 3:30pm if there is no verdict delivered.
You mean it was created by the IMF ?
BBCs Vicky Pollard did a special on sexual harassment this morning (I hope that it wasn’t any of you conspirators that she was talking about!).
Extremely articulate young woman and her supporters spent an hour giving examples from the downright illegal to the ‘he looked at me’ examples. But there was something that seemed staged about this, there was something odd in the language that she used – all from the lexicon of the activist, and of course her final message praised Labour MPs Stella Creasy and Yvette Cooper.
Another bit of BBC mind manipulation / activism?
Anyway got to go, I have to repeat 100 times; I am a man, therefore I am a rapist…I am a man, therefore I am a rapist…
Yeah but no but like I was in the precinct right and this man totally like perved at me and I like gave him evils but he still kept on lookin at me like a total perve and don’t listen to Shaznay if she says I’m lyin’ cos I’m not lyin’ an I ain’t got nuthin to say to her cos everyone knows she went with Darren Miller when she knew full well I was with Darren Miller.
jury: “can a juror reach a verdict based on a reason not presented in court where there is no fact or evidence to support it”
judge:”er no”
3 days of evidence, 4 days of deliberations
.. and 7 days (so far) of exes.. Another few and I’ll be able to afford another Merc for the little woman at home.
A properly informed jury – to repeat “PROPERLY” are a very powerful body. They have the ultimate power even if the judge, the prosecution and defence barristers – may have other ideas about which way a case may be ‘directed’.
Informing some juries is like trying to shout instructions through a bread pudding.
“Asked to define ‘reasonable doubt’, the judge replied: “A reasonable doubt is one that is reasonable. These are ordinary English words.”
He’s got his work cut out.
Sounds like they [the jurors] are all victims of the Shirley Williams reform programme.
It’s obvious she’s as guilty as hell and threw a load of dish at an expensive Lawyer to come up with an excuse! QED
breaking news breaking news
axminster carpets in administration
The great dumbing down of the UK is exposed by the questions asked by the jury