October 29th, 2013

Exclusive: Cops Trying to Remove Private Eye From Shops

Police are requesting “on behalf of the Crown Prosecution Service” that magazine vendors refrain from selling today’s edition of Private Eye. This afternoon two plain clothes policemen asked this vendor working outside Farringdon Station to take down this week’s Eye. When the vendor, who does not wish to be named, asked them why, they said it was at the request of the CPS, specifically because of the cover featuring Rebekah Brooks. They showed identification. The vendor told the cops he would keep selling them unless they produced a court order. Chilling…

Down the road at the nearby Old Bailey potential jurors were asked if they were readers of Private Eye or Guido Fawkes during the selection process. If they answered affirmatively they were excused from jury service. Anyone else a little hacked off by all this?

UPDATE:  Index on Censorship – the free speech campaign with offices near Farringdon Station – went to check for themselves:

The judge doesn’t find Private Eye amusing:

UPDATE: 17.24 


257 Comments

  1. 1
    Andrew Efiong says:

    Welcome to a vision of Ed Miliband’s future where policies are cooked up late at night over takeaway pizza shared with celebrities and Leftie grudge groups.

    Like

    • 24
      Mitch says:

      Private Eye has been removed before for similar reasons. Like it or not, there are laws on prejudicing a trial. I have no idea what the evidence the police have on this is.

      Like

    • 26
      Farage will tear you apart again says:

      What if they all say they are Sun readers? Guido’s column could make 75% of the population ineligible.

      Like

    • 33
      The Police State Advances says:

      The Police are preventing the public from reading the free press?

      Have we taken on North Korean Law?

      Like

      • 36
        Mitch says:

        I’m as uncomfortable with this as you, but having a “free press” doesn’t mean they can print literally anything.

        Like

        • 44
          Casual Observer 3 says:

          Having a free press does mean that they can print literally anything.

          However, that printing does come with responsibilities.

          Absent a court order the police are well outside their authority in asking the newsagent to take down the publication. One hopes that badge numbers were recorded.

          Like

        • 45
          We are ruled by Law not the Police says:

          But that is for the courts to decide. A copper can NOT ban a free press without an order of the court.

          Like

          • Casual Observer 3 says:

            They certainly do not have any right whatsoever to request that publications are taken down from display and not sold unless those publications are in some way breaking the law or contravening a court order of which the officer should be able to produce without the need for demand.

            Plain clothes police are a little more sinister as well. The CPS / police did not want this little bit of deceit to be obvious to the general public.

            Like

        • 157
          D Notice says:

          Free press?

          Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

          Like

      • 46
        Peter Martin says:

        “Are you now, or have you ever laughed at a Lord Gnome comment?”

        On the plus side, I now know what to have poking out of the top pocket to continue my avoidance of Jury Service.

        Like

      • 67
        HEARDITALL says:

        It proves just how far the police have been politicised

        Like

        • 74
          The Flying Spaghetti Machine says:

          As if the attempt to fit up M!tchell wasn’t confirmation enough :-)

          Like

        • 77
          Sick of the greed and lies(still) says:

          I disagree. It just shows that the bosses of the police in question have been told to do something and delegated it to the lowest rung of the ladder. They said it was due to the CPS. I suspect that the police answered “how high” to the question “Jump” rather than “why must we jump?”.
          If someone senior enough gives an order in whatever organisation someone works in, it’s usually followed.

          Like

      • 179
        Gavin Phillipson says:

        No, the CPS is trying to ensure that potential jurors are not prejudiced by the article. Duh.

        Like

      • 183
        Anonymous says:

        I wouldnt call “private eye” the free press !

        Like

    • 34
      ffamaff says:

      Wow is Ed Miliband PM already?

      Like

      • 151
        Anonymous says:

        No ffamaff,he is not currently PM. But it seems to me that somebody is instructing the police service to attempt to bring about the demise of democracy & rule of law.
        This is occuring,not under a socialist goverment,but a so called Tory led one.
        Be afraid,be very afraid.

        Like

        • 239
          Anonymous says:

          Ed is instructing the Police Service now? I’m surprised you can type – doesn’t your tinfoil hat get in the way?

          Like

        • 246
          I Crause says:

          Yeah, this isn’t the socialist hell of a Pinochet for God’s sake so thank God there is no historical correlation between a rightwing government for the wealthy and social repression.

          Like

    • 42
      Selohesra says:

      And iI’d better confiscate that copy of Razzle as well whilst I’m at it

      Like

    • 53
      PT says:

      um hang on, I thought that Cameron was prime minister.

      Like

    • 56
      Yeah, right.... says:

      Where would our justice system be if jurors were informed of the facts?

      Like

    • 113
      Officer Dibble says:

      So by drawing attention to Private Eye and this blog with their hamfisted attempt at censorship, won’t the jurors now be left wondering what on earth the CPS didn’t want them to read – and maybe be tempted to find out?

      Like

    • 133
      The Plot Thickens says:

      So the Police were acting on their own. The Judge expected the Jurors to see it.

      Like

      • 136
        Mitch says:

        I genuinely don’t see how it would influence them, anyway?

        Like

        • 169
          Barnehurst Bob says:

          I was expecting some really risky yet witty joke from Hislop and Co. This is pretty poor by thier standards. Pressdram must be delighted by the free publicity and Brooks et al should try googling ‘the Streisand effect’

          Like

      • 140
        Fishy says:

        But what has Guidoo done to annoy the Judge and Labour’s Kier Starmer?

        Fingered the Morgan, the Daily Mirror and the Guardian for phone hacking, or paying and shagging coppers?

        One law for the Hacked Off….?

        Like

        • 155
          broderick crawford says:

          there is NOTHING here that could by any stretch of whomsoever s imagination be considered in contempt .

          on a broader front how many outlets were the police intending to visit uk wide to stop the magazine from selling . ?

          had they thought about a new under the counter market sprouting for it in the last outposts of soho bookshops …. now that the internet has shot all their traditional collections of pornographic foxes ??

          Like

      • 159
        The Cod-Father says:

        Could the police have been ‘bunged’ by someone to try it on ?

        That is part of what this trial is about, isn’t it ?

        Like

      • 167
        Being Anti-Ginger is Racist says:

        am i the only one to think she’s quite shaggable?

        Like

        • 176
          wet and warm says:

          Not at all – Dave likes a swift poke now and again.

          Like

        • 200
          TT says:

          Rusty roof, damp cellar!

          Like

        • 209
          Stefan Dennis says:

          You are sick mate, she’s been done so many times her clammy cabbage looks like a half chewed spam fritter and her brown hole looks like a fresh bullet wound. I heard she was sp!t roasted by the darker fellas in the print room at Wapping and Rupert had it on a loop when he banged that psycho dink bird who was also taking it up the wrongun from his son. Its a fucking messy affair and if it comes out in court SamCam will be shown up for the c0ck sniffer she is. Where do you think Dave got that ginger m0ng kid from?

          Like

    • 178
      Gavin Phillipson says:

      Since the action was based on the Contempt of Court Act 1981 not sure what you think this has to do with Miliband, vision or otherwise.

      Like

    • 191
      Anonymous says:

      EH When did Ed Milliband become in charge of the police?

      Like

    • 205
      Anonymous says:

      What the fuck has this got to do with Ed Milliband? In case you weren’t aware, he’s not in power.

      Like

    • 206
      Anonymous says:

      So these are Ed Miliband’s policies? The sneaky dastard hasn’t even been elected yet! If he can do this when a Conservative is Prime Minister, what will he be able to do if the public actually vote for him!

      (Note: I am being sarcastic here)

      Like

    • 215
      Mj says:

      Whats it got to do with labour?The cps is an arm of the law, and working for the tory government. I suppose this is all gordon browns fault? Clown.

      Like

    • 227
      Don't Call me Dave says:

      ??? How has Ed got anything to with this?? Pray explain. Granted I understand that Ed is the root of all evil and a festering pustule that to date ‘Call me Dave’ has been unable to lance. But sill “Welcome to a vision of Ed Miliband’s future where policies are cooked up late at night over takeaway pizza shared with celebrities and Leftie grudge groups.” is a bit much when the police and CPS misinterpret their powers

      Like

    • 240
      Anonymous says:

      Quite right! We should stick with the existing system where they are bought and paid for by corporations. Celebrities and leftie grudge groups should get their cheque books out like the rest of them! Takeway Pizza….. how …….. working class. Disgusting. If they can’t even be bothered to front up a fortnight somewhere in the south of France with a few oysters thrown in they are not entitled to democracy.

      Like

    • 245
      I Crause says:

      That’s an extremely perceptive comment but for a few small details such as a. The Government is Conservative led, b. Rebekkah Brooks is a rightwing journalist who edited a rightwing newspaper.
      Other than that the points were well made, I think.

      Like

  2. 2

    You’ve probably sealed his fate by publishing a pic of him. He’ll be dead in a ditch with planted “suicide” evidence by nightfall.

    Like

  3. 3
    Steve Miliband says:

    Thought publications needed a ‘Hugh Grant seal of approval’ before they could be sold?

    Like

  4. 4
    @jock_bastard says:

    Sign of things to come.

    Like

  5. 5
    WelshRacer says:

    The vendor should have noted down the cops identification number which by law they have to display.

    Hardly a good way of public money being used here. Nor do I believe the CPS would have made the request anyway.

    Like

  6. 7

    Does this opt out work for any case or just those featuring Ms Brooks? I would have thought that jurors who read Guido and the Eye might be a good bet when it comes to the administration of justice?

    Like

  7. 9
    mrsshitrit says:

    Outrageous

    Like

  8. 10
    Steve Miliband says:

    Quite a few shops to go then.

    Like

  9. 11
    Engineer says:

    If Policemen wish to read Private Eye, they should just buy a copy, not try to extract one with menaces from a newsagent.

    They’ll be fitting up Cabinet Ministers next.

    Like

  10. 12
    Rory Keelan says:

    Imagine the fuss if such a request went to the Grauniad (sic) or to the BBC – wild over-reach (and moreover (as usual) one that will produce the opposite outcome to that intended).

    Perhaps we should get the Eye to give every prospective juror accross London a free copy so that they can reply when called – “I have my Eye – can I go home now?”

    Like

  11. 14
    Leige Asper says:

    Takes me back to the days of the Raj, when punkha-wallahs were oppressed by their colonial masters. End slavery. Or something.

    Like

  12. 15
    Casual Observer 4 says:

    Somewhat strange, especially if they could not provide a court order.

    Like

  13. 16
    LondonDave says:

    Naturally I am against Magazine burnings.

    But I have no problems with the defence objecting to jurors if they wish.

    What’s wrong with defending your client against the state?

    Like

  14. 18

    Private-Eyegate and Guidogate.Innit?

    Like

    • 66
      Ellie-Mae (8) says:

      He should have made the cops buy them, that would have a) got rid of the upsetting picture and b) Doubled the eye’s circulation.

      Like

      • 194
        Paulo Bumcakes says:

        Really Ellie-Mae? There we are with the facts that show quiet plainly that the Eye currently sells 200,000 copies a fortnight.

        So are you stupid or just bitter?

        Like

  15. 19
    Lord Haw haw's mum says:

    If true the cops should have told the cps to get stuffed what an outrage

    Like

  16. 20
    Jack the Ripper says:

    You sure the policemen didn’t speak to the vendor because they were lost?

    Like

  17. 21
    AlanH says:

    I detect a Common Purpose footprint here. What an insidious bunch are they.

    Like

  18. 23
    Lord Haw haw's mum says:

    I do hope PE sue for loss of trade

    Like

  19. 25
    janet says:

    When the vendor, who does not wish to be named, asked them why ………

    Like

  20. 28
    Anonymous says:

    I’ve not bought Private Eye in a little while. Think I might treat myself today.

    Like

  21. 29
    Casual Observer 4 says:

    Yewtree age 74. Hmm…

    Like

  22. 31
    Riggsy Brown says:

    If the cop pictured – or any other cops visiting newsagents for the same purpose – actually used the words `on behalf of the Crown Prosecution Service’ they’d better be damned sure of their facts. This has the potential to become very interesting!

    Like

  23. 32
    Caligula says:

    “We do not wish to see your papers!”

    Like

  24. 38
    Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says:

    I hope my subscription copy of the Eye is already in the post.

    But thanks for the warning that it has the ginger minger on the cover.

    Like

  25. 39
    Anonymous says:

    The names and numbers of any police officers doing this kind of thing need to be published. A sworn constable is an independent officer of the law – the Police Federation say so. He or she is therefore personally responsible for his or her actions. No more “a police officer”. We need to read “PC Smith, number AB1234, from Charing Cross station”.

    Like

  26. 41
    The Judge should be removed says:

    So the Judge is saying that I am not fit to be a juror because I have read Geedo Forks?

    Of course that would rule out Parliament, Beeboids, window lickers, leftist trolls, Gary Elsby, Brian Leveson, Mr J and the PM from doing Jury service too.

    Like

  27. 43

    I don’t read Private Eye.

    Neither do I read Guido Fawkes.

    Can I be on the jury?

    Thanks!

    Hang ‘em, your honour!

    Oh! And hang that Piers Wosisname as well…

    Like

  28. 47
    Hungry Hippo says:

    100 out of 78 voters votes Labour

    Like

  29. 51
    Shocked of Sheen says:

    Has anyone actually seen a copy? If so please tell what it says/shows/whatever…

    Like

  30. 54
    Sir William Wayd says:

    The Eye is not exactly pro-Murdoch you know.

    Like

    • 65
      Mitch says:

      Cook’s widow will be sh*tting herself. She explicitly bans them from being controversial. The Eye is her personal cash-cow these days.

      Like

  31. 55
  32. 61
    MB. says:

    If the CPS think the magazine compromises the trial then they should get a court order opr injunction or whatever.

    Like

  33. 62
    David Cameron says:

    I’m afraid my dear old chestnut mare is in a bad way. I may have to have her put down. She was a faithful friend and servant in her day, though Sam never relly took to her.

    Like

  34. 64
    I'm only a comedian, I'm just 'avin' a laugh says:

    If they, whoever they are, Judges, Hacked Off, Common Purpose, are scared that jurors might be biased, will they be asking if the watch or listen to BBC News?

    Like

  35. 69
    who why what where when says:

    Will any jurors who watched wall-to-wall BBC coverage of Leveson and accompanying news reports also be excused jury service?
    Surely the endless anti-N.I and Murdoch bias would be prejudicial.It was also wrongly stated as fact that messages on Millie Dowlers’ phone had been deleted.

    Like

  36. 70
    Big John says:

    Careful Guiido, I am Big John, senior controller of Big Brother, I’m watching you boy !

    Like

    • 235
      A Flat Minor says:

      .. and there was us all thinking you were long dead at the bottom of that mine shaft!

      Silly us.

      Like

  37. 73
    The Guardianistas says:

    Well Well Well.

    Private eye readers and Guido Fawkes readers are not fit to be jurors. Only Guardianistas are allowed to decide the fates of Mrs Brooks and Mr Coulson

    Like

  38. 75
    Which? witch? says:

    Must be another female. Wrong colour hair.

    In other news and in order to look busy while Sam still fumes, Out of office Dave impresses usual parties with his !slam Stock Exchange that even Gordon failed to deliver to the new ME masters.

    Like

    • 76
      Mayfa!r Pr!nce says:

      A discreet ve!l needs to be drawn over depositors.

      Like

    • 237
      Ancient seafarer says:

      Older readers will remember that we have been here before in the 1970s with the BCCI (affectionately known as Bank of Crooks and Criminals International) – also another muzzie (mainly Pakkystanny as I recall) operation.

      Like

  39. 80
    I (heart) Rebekah, I think its the hair says:

    Calm down dears. This is not an Orwellian plot, its one vendor and it is standard questioning in jury selection. Impartiality and all that, no?

    Like

    • 114
      Conspiracy Watch says:

      Or this could be a very subtle strategy to cause a mis-trial.

      Like

      • 166
        lies damn lies and Leveson says:

        It’s certainly not “standard questioning” to ask if jury members have read Private Eye or Guido.

        Like

        • 238
          I (heart) Rebekah, I think its the hair says:

          I was of course hopeing you would take my comments in a more (rational) general way. They would ask more specific questions to do with the case at hand. An example could be a serious firearms offense. Q. Do you read national rifle weekly?

          Like

  40. 81
    A Failed Tory MP says:

    Like

  41. 82
    Eastwick says:

    And I was going to buy that costume….. {here’s the cover}

    Like

  42. 84
    THIS IS WHAT THE FUSS IS ABOUT says:

    Like

    • 89
      FFS says:

      How ridiculous can a judge get?

      Like

      • 102
        Casual Observer 3 says:

        The Judge didn’t: No court order.

        It is the CPS who are complaining.

        Like

        • 106
          Can we get to the point? says:

          What are they complaining about?

          Or is this just a game of chinese whispers?

          Like

          • Casual Observer 3 says:

            What the CPS has problem with is irrelevant.

            Absent a court order the police have zero authority / right to attempt to compel the news stand holder from going about his business unless he is in some way breaking the law.

            If there is an issue of contempt here that is between the Judge and the publication, not the seller.

            Judge could have cut an order for news stands in vicinity of the court if there really was a problem.

            Like

      • 156
        Mornington Crescent says:

        Like

    • 93
      Lefty Mong says:

      That is clearly a sexist statement. What about people who wear skirts ?

      Like

      • 105
        The Gay Gordons says:

        Aye laddie.

        Like

      • 170
        broderick crawford says:

        all right then

        why am i prohibited from walking into a bank wearing a motorcycle helmet and a balaclava …. in witness to my religion which recognizes fast motorbikes and crime ….

        whereas any lady can apparently do the same but wearing a burqa and a hijab with impunity ??

        Like

      • 213
        Donald Von Trump says:

        I adore Scotchland… especially when I use my old joke (ex-max miller im told).

        I usually go upto a scotchman in a kilt, and say ” excuse me madame, which way to the hospital…” and more often than not they help me out with a punch to the face”

        Im scotch myself…

        Like

    • 94
      fruitcake says:

      I bet Hislop is giggling like stupid in the corner of his office over this one….arse

      Like

    • 96
      Sir Willam Wayd says:

      Next week, from Jacob Rees-Mogg, “How to appear a pompous twerp, Part II”.

      Like

      • 101
        For Sir's attention says:

        Jake ReesMog is a spoof twatter Sir William. The ral Rees-Mogg does not use the Twitter.

        Like

    • 98
      Gok Wan says:

      It’s more zombie than witch tbh..

      Like

    • 100
      Monopol! Mayfa!r Pr!nce says:

      Or have not yet bought a pair of jeans even though rich and over 40, Jacob?

      Like

    • 127
      What a name, what a guy, what a plonker says:

      I find it amusing that JakeReesMogg doesn’t find it amusing.

      Like

      • 131
        Mitch says:

        The spoof guy and the real Rees Mogg were interviewed together on R4 a few weeks ago. Strangely enough, the spoofer was funnier and more sensible.

        Like

    • 254
      Cynic says:

      She looks like an Irish Refugee from Sleepy Hollow

      Like

  43. 86
    The clearly nobbled jury in a few weeks time says:

    Deliberation Question to the judge:

    If we think they are guilty, but are not completely sure, can we phone a friend, like they wanted to on the first Huhne trial ?

    Like

  44. 87
    Sir Willam Wayd says:

    Farringdon Station, ‘across the road’ from the Old Bailey? Shome mishtake shurely? (Ed)

    Like

  45. 91
    A Maimed Badger says:

    One to bank in the memory, How to get off Jury Service… Now, who in their right mind has not heard of Guido or at some point come across Private Eye, watched Hislop On’t Telly, or for that matter Paul…Conclusion, Beware for soon a Jury will be made up of Neanderthals unable to read or Rabid Left Wingers, or Union Members.
    Counter productive, now many want to read Private Eye… or follow Guido.

    Like

    • 107
      J'ihadist Juror, who follows Anjem, other nutters and doesn't integrate much says:

      Aloha Akhbar !!!! Death by stoning innit.

      Like

    • 135
      Juror says:

      When I did jury service we hung around for ages waiting to be called on to a case. Various of us had brought books to read while waiting. Other people just sat there, not reading. Someone told me that this was because they couldn’t read.

      British justice, my arse!

      Like

      • 172
        broderick crawford says:

        we ve moved on since then …

        those same people are now walking the public highway staring into an iphone and smashing their heads against lamp posts .

        …. and they still cannot read .

        Like

  46. 92
    Common Porpoise says:

    Fishistic

    Like

  47. 97
    Orson Cart says:

    Media as childish as politics – All shit best ignored.

    Like

  48. 103
    Blind Justice says:

    Guido, I thought you had it in for Private Eye.

    Like

  49. 108

    Where’s the beef? Presumably the reason the CPS wanted it withdrawn was because they thought the content might bias the jurors and prejudice the trial. Doesn’t seem very chilling to me.

    Like

    • 112
      Mitch says:

      Not really. The problem is the cover, which makes a pretty tame joke about Brooks looking like a witch. How on earth would that influence a jury?

      Like

      • 118
        Casual Observer 3 says:

        Do non Guido / Eye readers burn witches, or find them guilty for no reason ?

        Like

      • 121
        Can we get to the point? says:

        Negatively

        Like

      • 186
        cynic says:

        Isn’t this based on an American story about ‘PC’ types getting such Halloween costumes withdrawn because they might frighten children? Here, our childish rulers send PC’s to frighten news vendors and jurors.

        Like

    • 168
      Maximus says:

      Indeed. Looking at the cover, I imagine it would if anything favour a conviction. Perhaps that is CPS’ concern.

      Like

    • 173
      broderick crawford says:

      the beef is that the cps know that a certain silk acting for the defendant must not be crossed at any cost due to his ” standing ” …

      Like

      • 180
        Anonymous says:

        What do you mean bevause David camerons brother is representing Rebekah brooks ?

        That’s entirely normal isn’t it…

        Like

  50. 110
    Select Troughers Committee says:

    We fully expect our energy discount vouchers after the usual media charade is played out. Can we have Becky in again before the Slammer shuts please?

    Like

  51. 115
    Ian Tomlinson's Ghost says:

    Could have been worse, much worse.

    Like

  52. 129
    Witches Brew says:

    That handbag is big enough to hold a folding bike AND she just called the doorman a Pleb.

    Like

  53. 130
    EU Funded Pro-EU Troll says:

    Vote UKIP

    Like

  54. 132
    Archimedes says:

    Comment of the day is nearly a week old now…

    Like

  55. 138
    Hoots! It's Clown says:

    Just finished a highly paid lecture tour around London, Paris, New York, Munich.

    Why did everyone talk about pop music?

    Like

  56. 139
    Anonymous says:

    You mean my twitter feed wasn’t included in the judge’s banning order? I am bloody annoyed, must try harder obviously

    Like

  57. 145
    Fishy says:

    Presumably the judge also asked if any of the potential jurors watched the BBC, given its downright prejudicial comments and innuendo about Brooks over the past 6-9 months.

    Like

  58. 146
    John Reid says:

    Were private eye so outraged,when the spectator got used for printing stuff about Stehpen Lawrence murderes when they were in court,

    Like

  59. 148
    Fact Hunt says:

    Just when we seem to be making progress in pinning down the slimy Energy company spivs at the SC along comes the gobby northern twat Lavery on his class war crusade and lets them off the hook. Fucking imbecile.

    Like

  60. 149
    I d on't need no doctor says:

    It’s a ruse with regard to Rebecca Brookes. Inside is an article on the police federation and the police, that refers to them as lying scumbags.

    Like

  61. 150
    I d on't need no doctor says:

    People that live in glass houses shouln’t throw stones. Ian Hislop is not exactly an adonis.

    Like

  62. 154
    The Cod-Father says:

    Now this is a bad taste joke about the trial:

    http://twitter.com/Comrade58/status/394904563846631424

    Like

    • 181
      jr ewing says:

      your banner refers to ‘shops’.

      your story refers to just one vendor.

      worrying that police approached the guy, flashing their warrants. but until such time as all vendors are approached in the way you describe or evidence emerges that knacker has been fingering his way around other vendors in close proximity to Ye Olde Bailey…well..if it looks like bullshit and it smells like bullshit..

      if you’d waited for more vendors to come forward you’d at least have a more convincing conspiracy theory.

      Like

  63. 175
    warrenjamesjunior says:

    To be fair, this is hardly a new development in legal history… under the Contempt of Court Act anything likely to prejudice a juror in a trial, including media coverage, has to be out of sight, otherwise Brooks’s lawyer can easily argue for the case to be dismissed, or a retrial with new jury. Jurors are routinely told not to look at certain newspapers etc while a trial is under way. Only fair….

    Like

    • 184
      jr ewing says:

      a good point I, guido and just about everyone else on here has missed.

      maybe PE is running a spoiler. maybe PE is in cahoots with the legal defence team.

      now there’s a conspiracy theory..

      Like

    • 203
      HEARDITALL says:

      But the point is it is not for the police to decide!

      Like

    • 226
      Barak O'room lawyer says:

      “nything likely to prejudice a juror in a trial, including media coverage, has to be out of sight”

      That applies within the court, not out in the street in public.

      Like

  64. 187
    The Met Cowboys - Not A Yankee Football Team says:

    “They’ll be fitting up Cabinet Ministers next.”

    or shooting dead lawyers daring to use bird shot in their own back garden

    Like

    • 196
      Ghost of Duggan. says:

      Don’t forget that after I was shot dead by plod, I still managed to throw my gun 5 metres or so over a fence. If you believe that, you’ll believe anything.

      Like

  65. 188
    mraemiller says:

    “In this case in a way not only are the defendants on trial, but British justice is on trial”

    Not prejudical at all

    Like

  66. 189
    Justice for Raisa says:

    Country supper anyone?

    Like

  67. 198
    Dave the Lying Bastard says:

    Always remember that the Government is only acting to protect your safety. Take care, you fools.

    Like

  68. 199
    Curious Pleb says:

    Why is hacking by Rebekah and the rest of the Press bad, whereas hacking and snooping by GCHQ is good?

    Like

  69. 202
    Jacob Rees-Mogg's Nanny says:

    I’m not amused by this one either

    Like

  70. 211
    Anonymous says:

    The jurors are being asked if they read Private Eye? Shurely Some Mistake.

    They should however, be asked if they are Guardian readers – that is showing real contempt

    Like

  71. 217
    Dave's PR SPAD No 22 says:

    How much did that publicity cost Hislop

    Like

  72. 218
    Dave's PR SPAD No 22 says:

    “Private Eye front cover has been brought to our attention, but AG has decided proceedings for a potential contempt of court aren’t required”

    Ie its not illegal but the Met and CPS thought that if they put the frighteners on they could force it to be withdrawn. The next step to the Nazi State

    Like

  73. 220
    Bunga-a-go-go says:

    I think a few people have got the wrong end of the stick here, its not a national banning of PE, more like an attempt to prevent jurors on the case from buying it on their way to the hearing.

    Like

  74. 221
    Roddy Ashworth says:

    Might be useful if you showed the cover …

    … so we jurors can make our own minds up. DOH!

    Like

  75. 223
    CandyHunt says:

    The cops let her off with a domestic violence charge against her ex husband. Though of course, had the roles been reversed he would have been charged, because the police have zero tolerance for domestic abuse if the victim is female. Only women are allowed to commit abuse with impunity. The richer they are, the better and the more they can get away with.

    The police also took large amounts of cash from her paper in return for stories. It seems to me that putting the frighteners on a newspaper vendor illegally is simply a continuation of their policy towards this witch.

    Like

  76. 225
    Porky pies from ploddy pigs? says:

    So has anyone checked that plod were telling the truth, i.e. did the CPS actually “request” that the plod took this action.

    As a betting man, I’m going for “did they, fuck”.

    Like

    • 228
      Bored says:

      Not come across this site before,nor will again.What a lot of sad folk with nothing better to do.Like me now.

      Like

      • 231
        durtyden says:

        Well you certainly gave a fascinating critique of the ongoing erosions of our freedoms. Back to watching Eastenders for you.

        Like

  77. 230
    Me says:

    The judges comments were worrying. Are the culprits being set up for an innocence verdict?

    Like

  78. 233
    Anonymous says:

    lol at all you fails blaming the “lefties” when you know it’s the righties defending their own.

    screeching idiots.

    Like

  79. 234
    the real story says:

    Come on Guido, PE pisses the police off? Thats not news.

    Tell us some juicy details about when dave used to fuck rebecca

    Like

  80. 241
    alanbstardmp says:

    If jury members can be influenced by what they read then the request is fair

    Like

    • 242
      Anonymous says:

      So you think your average jury member so stupid that a cover suggesting Rebekah Brooks looks like she’s wearing a Hallowe’en costume would prejudice their decision?

      Like

  81. 243
    Nemesis says:

    This fucking country and its conniving police forces becomes more and more like North Korea every day.

    Like

  82. 244
    Anonymous says:

    Bloody judge is going to make a mockery of this trial. He’s a tory sympathiser and probably had instructions to sabotage the trial in some way. Anyone taking odds on a not guilty verdict?

    Like

  83. 248
    Jabez says:

    Rees-Moggy You are a fool – no further comment. As for Private Eye and the news vendor who stood firm! they both are my Heroes.

    Like

  84. 251

    It’s clear a situation is being manufactured where a “fair trial” will become impossible and they’ll abandon attempts to jail the top people in this. PRIVATE EYE, the internet, even comments like these will be used as the excuse.

    Like

  85. 252
    YoungInnocent says:

    The judge has already established himself as a clear idiot with the Fawkes/Private Eye ruling.

    I will be handing out free copies of the Eye outside the Court on Monday morning.

    Like

  86. 257
    Anonymous says:

    Surely the Constabulary should be asking questions about the electorate subsidized Fuel Bills of the Members of Parliament not about Private Eye?

    Like


Media Reader

Yes Scotland’s Geo-Targeting Advertising Fail | MessageSpace
Westminster Has Patronised Scots | Scottish Sun
BBC Crew Attacked in Russia | BBC
UK Top 10 Influencer Political Blogs | Cision
Indy Editor: We Will Stay Afloat | Press Gazette
Chicken Salmond Runs Away From Sun Cabbie | Sun
Middle Class Moralism of Owen Jones | Spiked
Nick Robinson Attacked as “Liar” | Mail
Bush Aide Live Tweets 9/11 | Media Guido
Murdoch v Morgan | Breitbart
Clacton Tories Say Parris Will Make Them Vote UKIP | Breitbart


VOTER-RECALL
Find out more about PLMR


The Prime Minister feels the pressure:

“I have to say that after the events I have been facing over the last few days, assassination would be a welcome release.”



It was only a tiny tiny collision.


Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives

Subscribe me to:






RSS




AddThis Feed Button
Archive


Labels
Guido Reads
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,465 other followers