News1 min ago
Plebgate...police Have Another Opportunity To Apologise !
http://
Yet another appearance before the Home Affairs Committee. What is the chances of the Police telling the truth this time ? And why are they still not suspended for lying to Parliament ?
Yet another appearance before the Home Affairs Committee. What is the chances of the Police telling the truth this time ? And why are they still not suspended for lying to Parliament ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mikey4444. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
PP, George Carman was acting from beyond the grave when the junior Maxwells were answering questions, wasn't he? Anyway, any lawyer would say it was worth a try ! It shouldn't work, but then the House of Commons committees are not staffed with counsel. The House itself has plenty, but none of them are good enough to make a decent living at it, which is why they are MPs.
Number one awkwardly had to request permission to read out a prepared statement, which Vaz allowed. There's something odd about the apparent inability to just sit there and answer questions spontaneously. How many heads got together and sweated over what words went into that statement?
Number two tried that "I adopt the evidence of..." thing but Vaz warned him that this was something they only do in America and that it isn't valid here.
My attention was divided so I don't remember what was said next, other than he also read out a prepared statement.
In an earlier plebgate thread, I speculated on whether someone a lot higher up the management chain than the Downing Street Gate officers may have instigated all these goings on and it's as if, even with these senior-ish Commissioner staff, someone is overseeing their every move.
Are they going to be fall guys?
Maybe I'm reading far too much into this and it's just some macho BS thing about not wanting to appear weak for being seen to change your mind about a stance they've taken.
Number two tried that "I adopt the evidence of..." thing but Vaz warned him that this was something they only do in America and that it isn't valid here.
My attention was divided so I don't remember what was said next, other than he also read out a prepared statement.
In an earlier plebgate thread, I speculated on whether someone a lot higher up the management chain than the Downing Street Gate officers may have instigated all these goings on and it's as if, even with these senior-ish Commissioner staff, someone is overseeing their every move.
Are they going to be fall guys?
Maybe I'm reading far too much into this and it's just some macho BS thing about not wanting to appear weak for being seen to change your mind about a stance they've taken.
Grumpy...your assertion that all the present problems that the Police face is all down to Blunkett and his PCSO's is pure drivel.
PCSO's, as far as I am aware, had nothing whatsoever to do with the Andrew Mitchell case, and nothing to do with these Officers that have been hauled before the Commons Select Committee for not being honest. I cannot for the life of me understand how you can conflate the two issues. There may be a case for debating PCSO's but it has no place in this discussion.
PCSO's, as far as I am aware, had nothing whatsoever to do with the Andrew Mitchell case, and nothing to do with these Officers that have been hauled before the Commons Select Committee for not being honest. I cannot for the life of me understand how you can conflate the two issues. There may be a case for debating PCSO's but it has no place in this discussion.
It appears that one of them may have lied about his disciplinary record.
http://
http://
Mikey - which planet have you landed on today -
even I can tell you that a House of Commons cttee is different to a court of law.
You are still going after perjury I think - and they didnt perjure themselves - they didnt take an oath for a start and that was why Vaz stressed that if they didnt trooth, they would be v v naughty boys and sent to bed early -because that is all they can do.
It is possible to perjure yourself outside court - Archer did it. If you recollect his affidavit about Monica Coghlan was the evil act. It is of course possible to perjure yourself inside court - the younger Aitken did that having had the Bill of Rights 1689 altered so that he COULD sue. A successful perjury prosecution needs an independent witness to the evil act.
The Courts Act 1980 settled what was a court and not.....
however case law has enlightened us. The GMC [doctors' regulator] tried to get the Beeb shut away for contempt but it was held that the GMC was not a court of record so did not have that right. They also referred Dr Nickolaides to the Police for making untrue replies ( = perjury, funnily enough on the same point as no 2 - his disciplinary record ) to the GMCunder oath and the Police declined to prosecute. The GMC then brought a case for malpractice (at the GMC) for making untrue replies and brought in a determination of unfit to practise
still.....
even I can tell you that a House of Commons cttee is different to a court of law.
You are still going after perjury I think - and they didnt perjure themselves - they didnt take an oath for a start and that was why Vaz stressed that if they didnt trooth, they would be v v naughty boys and sent to bed early -because that is all they can do.
It is possible to perjure yourself outside court - Archer did it. If you recollect his affidavit about Monica Coghlan was the evil act. It is of course possible to perjure yourself inside court - the younger Aitken did that having had the Bill of Rights 1689 altered so that he COULD sue. A successful perjury prosecution needs an independent witness to the evil act.
The Courts Act 1980 settled what was a court and not.....
however case law has enlightened us. The GMC [doctors' regulator] tried to get the Beeb shut away for contempt but it was held that the GMC was not a court of record so did not have that right. They also referred Dr Nickolaides to the Police for making untrue replies ( = perjury, funnily enough on the same point as no 2 - his disciplinary record ) to the GMCunder oath and the Police declined to prosecute. The GMC then brought a case for malpractice (at the GMC) for making untrue replies and brought in a determination of unfit to practise
still.....
Thanks PP...a very full reply !
Maybe I am getting confused here. I know that Parliament takes a very dim view if an MP or Minister appears to have lied in the Chamber. Its just that I thought that as these Select Committees are, in effect, adjuncts of the House, lying to them while giving evidence, might be the same sort of thing
On another related issue, I wonder when we can expect the Police and the CPS to pull their respective fingers out and come to some kind of conclusion about the original investigation into the Plebgate affair, As I understand it, 8 people have been arrested, some of them serving Policemen. As the incident happened over a year ago, it doesn't seem unreasonable to expect some progress in this matter. The Home Secretary thought so a week or two ago, and said so publicly, but she seems unable to move things along a bit.
Maybe I am getting confused here. I know that Parliament takes a very dim view if an MP or Minister appears to have lied in the Chamber. Its just that I thought that as these Select Committees are, in effect, adjuncts of the House, lying to them while giving evidence, might be the same sort of thing
On another related issue, I wonder when we can expect the Police and the CPS to pull their respective fingers out and come to some kind of conclusion about the original investigation into the Plebgate affair, As I understand it, 8 people have been arrested, some of them serving Policemen. As the incident happened over a year ago, it doesn't seem unreasonable to expect some progress in this matter. The Home Secretary thought so a week or two ago, and said so publicly, but she seems unable to move things along a bit.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.