No, I haven't, which is why I've refrained from commenting on it. It is impossible to have a valid view on the decision withourt having read it. I'm amazed that you feel qualified to call it "errant, vexatious, perverse and almost laughable" without having done so. Indeed these adjectives appear more applicable to your wholly uniformed opinion.
mmm .. so you consider the judgment to be a good one without having read the case through, I consider it a bad judgement without having read the case through .. who's the pot and who's the kettle here ? .. and my opinion is formed by the background to the case, lying policemen, lying union officials, jailed and disciplined policemen, yet their mate is given the benefit of the doubt .. your opinion is formed how ? .. are you a relative or friend of the buffoon of a judge who delivered this 'verdict' or merely an argumentative twit?
Where did he say it was a good judgment? He said he was refraining from commenting until he had read it, the opposite of what you're doing, so it would appear you are both the pot and kettle.
No, I haven't, which is why I've refrained from commenting on it. It is impossible to have a valid view on the decision withourt having read it. I'm amazed that you feel qualified to call it "errant, vexatious, perverse and almost laughable" without having done so. Indeed these adjectives appear more applicable to your wholly uniformed opinion.
mmm .. so you consider the judgment to be a good one without having read the case through, I consider it a bad judgement without having read the case through .. who's the pot and who's the kettle here ? .. and my opinion is formed by the background to the case, lying policemen, lying union officials, jailed and disciplined policemen, yet their mate is given the benefit of the doubt .. your opinion is formed how ? .. are you a relative or friend of the buffoon of a judge who delivered this 'verdict' or merely an argumentative twit?
Where did he say it was a good judgment? He said he was refraining from commenting until he had read it, the opposite of what you're doing, so it would appear you are both the pot and kettle.
Judge finds in favour of a copper who had changed his account of events several times over the course of the scandal, none of which was corroborated by CCTV evidence or witness statements. And they wonder why people think the relationship between the courts and the coppers is cosy. Protecting their own as usual, can't believe anyone, including Mitchell, thought it would have gone down any other way.
Hilarious.
You know perfectly well that if Mitchell was a Labour MP then you'd be praising the judgement from the rooftops, but because it's one of your team that has been turned over then the Judge must be bent. Ridiculous.
Turns out Mitchell was a serial offender and now he has paid a heavy price for his conduct and extraordinary hubris in taking this to the courts when he must have known that News Corp.'s lawyers would take about 10 minutes to find out about his past conduct in abusing those lower down the food chain than him.
Judge finds in favour of a copper who had changed his account of events several times over the course of the scandal, none of which was corroborated by CCTV evidence or witness statements. And they wonder why people think the relationship between the courts and the coppers is cosy. Protecting their own as usual, can't believe anyone, including Mitchell, thought it would have gone down any other way.
Hilarious.
You know perfectly well that if Mitchell was a Labour MP then you'd be praising the judgement from the rooftops, but because it's one of your team that has been turned over then the Judge must be bent. Ridiculous.
Turns out Mitchell was a serial offender and now he has paid a heavy price for his conduct and extraordinary hubris in taking this to the courts when he must have known that News Corp.'s lawyers would take about 10 minutes to find out about his past conduct in abusing those lower down the food chain than him.
I've never voted Tory or supported Tory and I've been pretty vocal in my criticism of this government elsewhere on this forum. So really that undermines your whole argument. Jog on sunshine.
At least we both agree that Mitchell is a nasty piece of work and should have avoided taking it to court, which he only did for his own ego. Doesn't change the fact that courts and coppers protect one another. The defence that the copper was too stupid to think up Mitchell's words on the spot is laughable - if the copper is that thick, why he is guarding the entrance to Downing Street? Or even a copper at all? Reminds me of Arry's defence that he can't read, therefore there's no way he could be involved in tax evasion.
Don't worry Fiish, Orms likes to jump to conclusions when a post doesn't match his opinions,at least you were spared personal insults.
I have to say that the CL archives will bear out that Ormiston and me disagree on almost every non-sporting subject going.
However I do not recall personal insults emanating from his quarter ever though although there are certainly those on here who resort to them for sure.
Some might be confusing Australian directness with insults in my view.
"A police officer has been found guilty of misconduct for his role in the "plebgate" affair, involving former chief whip Andrew Mitchell. West Mercia inspector Ken Mackaill, a former Police Federation official, was accused of giving misleading accounts of a meeting with Mr Mitchell in 2012. The meeting followed claims the Tory MP called police "plebs", which he denied. An independent panel ruled on Thursday Insp Mackaill had breached the standards of professional behaviour.
After the meeting in October 2012, the men from the Police Federation told the media Mr Mitchell had not given a full account of the incident and called for him to resign. But a recording of the meeting cast doubt on what they had said."
So, just the 3 years to investigate a recording. Astonishing.
"A police officer has been found guilty of misconduct for his role in the "plebgate" affair, involving former chief whip Andrew Mitchell. West Mercia inspector Ken Mackaill, a former Police Federation official, was accused of giving misleading accounts of a meeting with Mr Mitchell in 2012. The meeting followed claims the Tory MP called police "plebs", which he denied. An independent panel ruled on Thursday Insp Mackaill had breached the standards of professional behaviour.
After the meeting in October 2012, the men from the Police Federation told the media Mr Mitchell had not given a full account of the incident and called for him to resign. But a recording of the meeting cast doubt on what they had said."
So, just the 3 years to investigate a recording. Astonishing.
Ah the legal profession. Just cannot keep their snouts out of the trough.
Comments
supporterJudge and he said it was a pukka judgement.You know perfectly well that if Mitchell was a Labour MP then you'd be praising the judgement from the rooftops, but because it's one of your team that has been turned over then the Judge must be bent. Ridiculous.
Turns out Mitchell was a serial offender and now he has paid a heavy price for his conduct and extraordinary hubris in taking this to the courts when he must have known that News Corp.'s lawyers would take about 10 minutes to find out about his past conduct in abusing those lower down the food chain than him.
At least we both agree that Mitchell is a nasty piece of work and should have avoided taking it to court, which he only did for his own ego. Doesn't change the fact that courts and coppers protect one another. The defence that the copper was too stupid to think up Mitchell's words on the spot is laughable - if the copper is that thick, why he is guarding the entrance to Downing Street? Or even a copper at all? Reminds me of Arry's defence that he can't read, therefore there's no way he could be involved in tax evasion.
However I do not recall personal insults emanating from his quarter ever though although there are certainly those on here who resort to them for sure.
Some might be confusing Australian directness with insults in my view.
Good to know this is one example of Orms' good old Australian banter and 'directness' during a reasonable discussion thread.
''I know you probably can't help coming across as a patronising, supercilious and thoroughly self-satisfied individual''
I have to say I'm thoroughly self-satisfied about this explanation. God bless his little cotton socks.
;-)
"A police officer has been found guilty of misconduct for his role in the "plebgate" affair, involving former chief whip Andrew Mitchell.
West Mercia inspector Ken Mackaill, a former Police Federation official, was accused of giving misleading accounts of a meeting with Mr Mitchell in 2012.
The meeting followed claims the Tory MP called police "plebs", which he denied.
An independent panel ruled on Thursday Insp Mackaill had breached the standards of professional behaviour.
After the meeting in October 2012, the men from the Police Federation told the media Mr Mitchell had not given a full account of the incident and called for him to resign.
But a recording of the meeting cast doubt on what they had said."
So, just the 3 years to investigate a recording. Astonishing.