Brexit, for once some facts.

[Barry Shittpeas]

So would you say that its very likely several newspaper reporters (they will already know DCs car number plate) will have already bribed people to interrogate the data base, and as nothing has been reported then there is no evidence of him making the second trip North?

Wouldn't foreign security services such as the Russians consider doing the same thing to get some kompromat on an important person like Cumming, it might pay off very handsomely in years to come. In a similar fashion to what Putin has possible got on Trump.

Each time the database is searched, that search is logged against the user’s identity. They randomly dip test the searches carried out and the person performing it has to prove that it was for a lawful policing purpose. If they can’t, without question, they will be sacked and prosecuted. This used to happen frequently and now anyone using the system is very aware of the consequences.

Some number plates will trigger and immediate investigation if searched for on ANPR. Cummings’s number plate will be on that list. I have no doubt that his plate will have been searched lawfully at some time during the course of this debacle, but what happens with the search return is another matter.

I have a feeling the filth can only keep the data for 30 days unless it’s classed as evidence within that period. They can’t keep it just in case it becomes useful at some time after 30 days has elapsed.

 

[Barry Shittpeas]

Not at all, Cummings isn't an important person in that sense, he's just an advisor so not even a political figure. This silly story has no value to anyone.

This whole matter is, as I've previously posted, a storm in a teacup and it should have been dropped long ago instead of being used for some supposed political advantage. I'm generally supportive of Labour and the Guardian but this petty campaign just discredits them

If the offence was committed it was a petty one that only merited an on the spot fine.

No one is ever convicted of anything serious solely on witness evidence of a sighting since the unreliability of that was well established very long ago. There always has to be strong supporting evidence since we all have doppelgängers, apparently a 1 in 135 chance of a near perfect one and many more chances of a near enough one to fool many.

I imagine that Cummings with his logical mind is secretly amused at the way this silly campaign is driving his accusers further up the wall with frustration.
.

The offence of breaking lockdown is a storm in a teacup, it’s nothing and should have been admitted. Cummings should have said,“We’d been isolated for ages, the kids were going mad, it was the wife’s birthday, we just went for a short outing. We didn’t meet anybody and remained distant as a family unit. It was wrong and I’m sorry for the poor example it’s set.“ That would have killed the story.

Instead, by trying to use the eyesight test and Johnson’s backing of that story, it’s become a matter of trust and integrity right at the heart of government. And at a time of unprecedented national crisis when trust and integrity is everything.

 

[oyster]

Not at all, Cummings isn't an important person in that sense, he's just an advisor so not even a political figure. This silly story has no value to anyone.

This whole matter is, as I've previously posted, a storm in a teacup and it should have been dropped long ago instead of being used for some supposed political advantage. I'm generally supportive of Labour and the Guardian but this petty campaign just discredits them

If the offence was committed it was a petty one that only merited an on the spot fine.

No one is ever convicted of anything serious solely on witness evidence of a sighting since the unreliability of that was well established very long ago. There always has to be strong supporting evidence since we all have doppelgängers, apparently a 1 in 135 chance of a near perfect one and many more chances of a near enough one to fool many.

I imagine that Cummings with his logical mind is secretly amused at the way this silly campaign is driving his accusers further up the wall with frustration.
.

It isn't the offence in itself so much as the lying that must have occurred if he did visit again (as well as what appeared to be lies in the earlier accounts).

If PM has not seen the evidence he claimed to have been persuaded by, or if the evidence he based his decision on is actually lies, it is a bigger issue. Including misleading parliament.

 

[flecc]

So when he said live to everyone in the garden press conference that he did not make the second trip up North then it does not matter if it could be proved he was lying?

I think if it could be proved ie with something like the ANPR evidence then he would have to resign, and BJ who has backed him and said he has seen evidence that DC did not make a second trip would be under tremendous pressure to go too.

As I posted, Cummings is merely an advisor holding no official public office, so wouldn't be obliged to resign.

Nor would Johnson, if all politicans who lied had to resign we wouldn't have any since they all routinely lie. It's an essential part of the job specification since the job isn't possible with truthfulness and honesty as those who've tried have found out. It's why Jimmy Carter only got one term as US president while the crooked Richard Nixon got two.

Nev, this Cummings issue is a non event that isn't going anywhere, it will only drive you to distraction. As an offence, if it occurred, it doesn't even have the status of parking on a yellow line. That does attract an on the spot fine, but what Cummings is supposed to have done would only attract that if he then disobeyed an officers instruction to drive back to London. That was the direction that police officers operated under and why so few fines were issued.

What the Guardian and Labour party are engaged in is a solely political campaign, having nothing whatsoever to do with law and order or the public interest. There are far more important issues for them to be engaged with in respect of this governments administration.
.

 

[flecc]

The offence of breaking lockdown is a storm in a teacup, it’s nothing and should have been admitted. Cummings should have said,“We’d been isolated for ages, the kids were going mad, it was the wife’s birthday, we just went for a short outing. We didn’t meet anybody and remained distant as a family unit. It was wrong and I’m sorry for the poor example it’s set.“ That would have killed the story.

Instead, by trying to use the eyesight test and Johnson’s backing of that story, it’s become a matter of trust and integrity right at the heart of government. And at a time of unprecedented national crisis when trust and integrity is everything.

One could argue that in telling a white lie to protect the PM, Cummings was showing integrity and loyalty, both praisworthy characteristics.

Whatever, as I've shown above this is and always was a non event. It isn't going anywhere and will be completely forgotten as more important issues than an ill judged alleged drive in the country arise.
.

 

[sjpt]

I think there is a law against lying to parliament, but no law against lying to the public. Is that correct?

('Is it right' would be a question with several interpretations.)

 

[Barry Shittpeas]

One could argue that in telling a white lie to protect the PM, Cummings was showing integrity and loyalty, both praisworthy characteristics.

Whatever, as I've shown above this is and always was a non event. It isn't going anywhere and will be completely forgotten as more important issues than an ill judged alleged drive in the country arise.
.

You may be right, I don't really care about it anymore. If this story does rumble on and Cummings eventually gets caught out, sacked and humiliated, I would laugh for a few seconds, so I would like that to happen. Beyond that, I don't care.

 

[jonathan.agnew]

You may be right, I don't really care about it anymore. If this story does rumble on and Cummings eventually gets caught out, sacked and humiliated, I would laugh for a few seconds, so I would like that to happen. Beyond that, I don't care.

I have difficult mixed feelings about it. A colleague spoke in a team meeting about seeing a patient this week and, after they both agreed to take the risk, taking of their masks (in an enclosed room, 2m apart) to make it easier to understand each other. He shared it as part of sharing with us how ludicrous the lockdown and its rules feel to him. The previous day I saw a patient - a carer in a care home who contracted covid and nearly died (she had copd before) and lost her job ("we're a small care home, we cant really afford long term I'll staff") with a very difficult personal history of abuse and neglect (and who is effectively alone).
I kind of understand where the colleague was coming from, but there are very real victims of the breaking of lockdown rules ( the patient contracted covid in the care home due to lack of ppe). I wont make a big deal about Cummings, but fundamentally dont believe he should be in his post.

 

[flecc]

I think there is a law against lying to parliament, but no law against lying to the public. Is that correct?

There is an internal rule, but there may not be any law since I'm unaware of anyone being punished for doing that. Most commonly an MP caught lying is required by the Speaker to leave the House but readmitted upon receipt of a formal apology.

It is rarely likely to arise since accusing another member of lying is itself an offence leading to that same expulsion from the House. The nearest to acceptably saying someone is lying is saying "That is not my recollection of the events".
.

 

[oyster]

There is an internal rule, but there may not be any law since I'm unaware of anyone being punished for doing that. Most commonly an MP caught lying is required by the Speaker to leave the House but readmitted upon receipt of a formal apology.

It is rarely likely to arise since accusing another member of lying is itself an offence leading to that same expulsion from the House. The nearest to acceptably saying someone is lying is saying "That is not my recollection of the events".
.

The ministerial code is quite clear that lying is not allowed.

Whether it gets applied or not is another matter.

Remember Profumo was effectively kicked out due to misleading HoC rather than any other single factor.

 

[flecc]

The ministerial code is quite clear that lying is not allowed.

Of course it is, but as you acknowledge it's rarely applied since it's simply not practical. Lying is integral to all politics whether we like it or not.

I disagree on Profumo, it was his activities that were most disliked, bringing the party into disrepute with the public. As with previous cases, lying is just the selective excuse used for expulsion, getting rid of the unwanted person while keeping all the other liars.

After all, Boris Johnson is the worst Tory liar of all time, something known and widely recognised ever since he learned to speak. But it didn't stop the party choosing him to be our Prime Minister, allowing him to lie to us and parliament continuously ever since.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

Brexiteer Mark Francois mocks Michel Barnier’s accent as he insists there will be a deal with EU


oldgroaner@oldgroaner

Imagine being mocked by a Mark Francois, a dubious character that can make a personal appearance as himself on Spitting image and get a laugh without incurring the expense of creating a dummy or even needing a script?

 

[sjpt]

But it didn't stop the party choosing him to be our Prime Minister, allowing him to lie to us and parliament continuously ever since.

And didn't stop the people of the UK electing his party.

 

[RossG]

Mention of the Profumo affair set me thinking where are they now ? It doesn't look like Christine Keeler aged too well, now living in a care home.

 

[Danidl]

Mention of the Profumo affair set me thinking where are they now ? It doesn't look like Christine Keeler aged too well, now living in a care home.

View attachment 37607

There would not be many sleek designer chairs capable of supporting her now.

 

[oyster]

Mention of the Profumo affair set me thinking where are they now ? It doesn't look like Christine Keeler aged too well, now living in a care home.

View attachment 37607

I don't think so! You'd not look that well towards three years after you died.

Christine Margaret Keeler (22 February 1942 – 4 December 2017) was an English model and showgirl.

 

[flecc]

I don't think so! You'd not look that well towards three years after you died.

Christine Margaret Keeler (22 February 1942 – 4 December 2017) was an English model and showgirl.

But doesn't this show how silly these witch hunt campaigns of condemnation of individual's behaviour are, like the current one against Cummings.

Christine Keeler lived to 75 years old, John Profumo to 91 years old, both lifespans easily long enough for fulfilment and decades longer than many whose livestyles are approved of by society.

The narrow minded bigots of 1961 would have been well advised to mind their own business instead of engaging in prurient behaviour.
.

 

[RossG]

I don't think so! You'd not look that well towards three years after you died.

Christine Margaret Keeler (22 February 1942 – 4 December 2017) was an English model and showgirl.

Thought that would wake everyone up . Was going to show a photo of Mandy Rice Davies but she too has now passed.

 

[RossG]

It seems Simon Cowell has come off of his E-bike and broke his back, thankfully his bike is alright.
This is a photo of his squeeze riding her bike with the caption ...


On the go: That day his girlfriend Lauren Silverman was seen riding her non-electric bicycle down a sunny street in Malibu

 

[wheeler]

On the go: That day his girlfriend Lauren Silverman was seen riding her non-electric bicycle down a sunny street in MalibuView attachment 37613

Looks like an e-bike to me.