gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Well this has all vanished in a puff of smoke. Quelle surprise.
I'm slightly confused by your first paragraph.?"X", or Twitter seems to be going downhil fast anyway. I got like an army of pornstar followers on Twitter..
Which is all to well i think. I'm not a fan of billionaires trying to take over the narrative
I just dont know what the details are, but i think i can dig it if Starmer worded it well.
My eyes. I thought it said Doris Karloff and was expecting to see a caricature of Ann Widdecombe.
I'm slightly confused by your first paragraph.?
Nah, that's usually when the name isn't in the public domain. It's almost always rumours. When that recording of Mason Greenwood was going round, there was no obligation to not mention it, to the point that he had to leave Man Utd even though he was never convicted. You're generally prevented from talking about it on here before the accused person is arrested. When Mendy was finally arrested, there was a long thread on here about it.Yes of course it was in the public domain before his arrest but I always thought that as soon as he was arrested the vid could not be shown. As an example, this place always talks about a naughty footballer and then Ric, or his minions, descend on us saying it's illegal and the thread gets shut down.
As I understand it, if a disturbance is classed as a riot, the government ( taxpayer ) has to pay for all the repairs and losses incurred. Insurance companies don't cover losses in those situations, so in a way, yes, there may be political pressure on the CPS not to charge people for 'civil commotion'.I’m still not clear why more haven’t been charged with rioting. Ten years maximum sentence; double than that for violent disorder. I know a riot charge needs the DPP’s express say-so, but inconceivable the CPS would decline, unless there’s political pressure for a ‘stepped approach’. So they can up the ante if things escalate.
I imagine it's more a case of them going for the easier to prove crimes, because the priority here was to get people convicted quickly. The main deterrent for a lot of these rioters is seeing people getting serious time. It's not a surprise that it's seemingly stopped after the first big convictions have been coming through.As I understand it, if a disturbance is classed as a riot, the government ( taxpayer ) has to pay for all the repairs and losses incurred. Insurance companies don't cover losses in those situations, so in a way, yes, there may be political pressure on the CPS not to charge people for 'civil commotion'.
It's not rocket science, do the crime, serve the time.Well this has all vanished in a puff of smoke. Quelle surprise.