Excuses, Excuses, Excuses

Betfair trading & Punting on politics. Be aware there is a lot of off topic discussion in this group centred on Political views.
Post Reply
Archery1969
Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am

jamesedwards wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 10:05 am
Archery1969 wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 9:20 am
That video on Sky looks rather shocking to say the least.
Where is the 30 secs preceding this, or did the video conveniently start just at that moment?
no idea. obviously you have to take everything into context, he could have been threatend during the 30 secs before. But the law on self defence is rather ambiguous for obvious reaons. The CPS prefer to prosecute and leave it upto a jury to decide if you used reasonable force.

i remember a few years back there was an altercation in Rottingdean near Brighton, boy punched a lad (Conner Saunders) who fell back and hit his head on the curb, he later died. CPS brought a charge of manslaughter. But the lad was found not guilty on all charges due to the other person starting the fight and provoking him.
Michael5482
Posts: 1693
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2022 8:11 pm

Archery1969 wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 10:27 am
jamesedwards wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 10:05 am
Archery1969 wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 9:20 am
That video on Sky looks rather shocking to say the least.
Where is the 30 secs preceding this, or did the video conveniently start just at that moment?
no idea. obviously you have to take everything into context, he could have been threatend during the 30 secs before. But the law on self defence is rather ambiguous for obvious reaons. The CPS prefer to prosecute and leave it upto a jury to decide if you used reasonable force.

i remember a few years back there was an altercation in Rottingdean near Brighton, boy punched a lad (Conner Saunders) who fell back and hit his head on the curb, he later died. CPS brought a charge of manslaughter. But the lad was found not guilty on all charges due to the other person starting the fight and provoking him.
Interesting listening to a lawyer this morning who was saying a single punch can be argued as self defence (as you've pointed to in a similar case) but the sustained attack while the vicitm was on the floor goes from a possible common assault to ABH which is difficult to defend against as the victim was defenceless at the point he's on the floor plus the victim clearly has his hands in his pocket and doesn't look at all threatening when the attack is launched.

The lad at the bottom of the CCTV is interesting if this was an altercation you'd expect raised voices, shouting swearing which people gathering around trying to break it up etc but he doesn't even turn around and people don't look/come over until the attack is launched. LBC played the audio earlier and Mike Amesbury is slavering on clearly 10 sheets to the wind.

He tried to spin it as him being the victim on Sunday morning trying to get people on his side and his spin has been quite rightly exposed.
Archery1969
Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am

Michael5482 wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 11:07 am
Archery1969 wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 10:27 am
jamesedwards wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 10:05 am


Where is the 30 secs preceding this, or did the video conveniently start just at that moment?
no idea. obviously you have to take everything into context, he could have been threatend during the 30 secs before. But the law on self defence is rather ambiguous for obvious reaons. The CPS prefer to prosecute and leave it upto a jury to decide if you used reasonable force.

i remember a few years back there was an altercation in Rottingdean near Brighton, boy punched a lad (Conner Saunders) who fell back and hit his head on the curb, he later died. CPS brought a charge of manslaughter. But the lad was found not guilty on all charges due to the other person starting the fight and provoking him.
Interesting listening to a lawyer this morning who was saying a single punch can be argued as self defence (as you've pointed to in a similar case) but the sustained attack while the vicitm was on the floor goes from a possible common assault to ABH which is difficult to defend against as the victim was defenceless at the point he's on the floor plus the victim clearly has his hands in his pocket and doesn't look at all threatening when the attack is launched.

The lad at the bottom of the CCTV is interesting if this was an altercation you'd expect raised voices, shouting swearing which people gathering around trying to break it up etc but he doesn't even turn around and people don't look/come over until the attack is launched. LBC played the audio earlier and Mike Amesbury is slavering on clearly 10 sheets to the wind.

He tried to spin it as him being the victim on Sunday morning trying to get people on his side and his spin has been quite rightly exposed.
Yeah, social media doesn’t help. Everyone and their dog has seen the video. Even if the judge tells the jury to ignore what they have previously seen. Some have already probably made a decision. But I guess everyone needs to see what happened previously to make an informed decision. Having said that, the more I watch it the more I think he is going to HMP somewhere soon.
User avatar
Derek27
Posts: 25157
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:44 am

greenmark wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 8:38 am
Derek27 wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2024 11:03 pm
jamesedwards wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2024 8:54 pm


Hate hate hate videos like this that only show half the story.
There's nothing wrong with videos that show half the story, the problem is with people who draw conclusions from it.

I saw footage of him apparently throwing the first punch and knocking the guy to the ground (who didn't seem to have been expecting it). If the threat was purely verbal it will be much harder to justify - I think he's in big trouble.
Indeed. This will go to court for sure. He's going to need a very, very good explanation. Probably already the end of his political career.
Frodsham is an odd place. It looks quite sleepy and cute, but there are people that flock in from other places over the weekend and it can kick off when they're tanked up.
He certainly looked tanked up!
User avatar
Derek27
Posts: 25157
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:44 am

jamesedwards wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 10:05 am
Archery1969 wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 9:20 am
That video on Sky looks rather shocking to say the least.
Where is the 30 secs preceding this, or did the video conveniently start just at that moment?
Videos never start at the beginning. Something has to happen in the first place for somebody to get their phone out and film it. Nobody films an argument, you start filming after the first punch. :)
User avatar
firlandsfarm
Posts: 3310
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

greenmark wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2024 1:20 pm
What hypocrisy! 14 years of total control and they f**kd up. Months later it's all Labour's fault. This is f**king insanity. I think I need to run to the hills. I'm surrounded by maniacs.
More Labour misleading stealth tactics! This is not about the state of the country and if anyone is to blame, this is about a political party lying to the British public to win an election.
User avatar
firlandsfarm
Posts: 3310
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

ForFolksSake wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2024 2:15 pm
Can't wait till Wednesday to find out who is/isn't a 'working' person and who are Rachel Reeves' 'strivers' 🧑‍💼👷‍♂️
What a load of 'bollocks'
Cabinet minister, Ms Phillipson who earns around £160,000 seems to think she qualifies as a "Working Person" but she couldn't bring herself to agree if the owner of a small business earning £13,000 is one! I know which one I would most consider 'working'.

As for your last point ... +1
User avatar
Derek27
Posts: 25157
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:44 am

firlandsfarm wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 5:49 pm
ForFolksSake wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2024 2:15 pm
Can't wait till Wednesday to find out who is/isn't a 'working' person and who are Rachel Reeves' 'strivers' 🧑‍💼👷‍♂️
What a load of 'bollocks'
Cabinet minister, Ms Phillipson who earns around £160,000 seems to think she qualifies as a "Working Person" but she couldn't bring herself to agree if the owner of a small business earning £13,000 is one! I know which one I would most consider 'working'.

As for your last point ... +1
A working person is someone who works, like Richard Branston or Alan Sugar. If Starmer wants to invent his own language we should just ignore it.

Can't for the life of me understand why he doesn't just say, people on low wages!
User avatar
firlandsfarm
Posts: 3310
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

Derek27 wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 5:52 pm
firlandsfarm wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 5:49 pm
ForFolksSake wrote:
Sun Oct 27, 2024 2:15 pm
Can't wait till Wednesday to find out who is/isn't a 'working' person and who are Rachel Reeves' 'strivers' 🧑‍💼👷‍♂️
What a load of 'bollocks'
Cabinet minister, Ms Phillipson who earns around £160,000 seems to think she qualifies as a "Working Person" but she couldn't bring herself to agree if the owner of a small business earning £13,000 is one! I know which one I would most consider 'working'.

As for your last point ... +1
A working person is someone who works, like Richard Branston or Alan Sugar. If Starmer wants to invent his own language we should just ignore it.

Can't for the life of me understand why he doesn't just say, people on low wages!
Agreed but even to say 'works' is problematic. He/They were stupid to introduce the comment, didn't their advisers warn them? Trouble is we can't ignore it if our individual tax bills are to be affected by such a definition. The Conservatives missed a trick by not causing all this disruption before the election!

I have 100 acres and although I am well past retirement age I can assure you I bloody well work! And with no pay so I guess I qualify from the 'low wages' aspect. :D
Archery1969
Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am

Labour in trouble with the speaker of the house…
User avatar
Derek27
Posts: 25157
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:44 am

Sky News showed the full footage from the CCTV. The guy had his hands in his pockets when he got punched, and the MP carried on punching him while he was on the ground.

When he said to the guy, "You'll never threaten me again", a woman said to him, "You'll never be an MP again". He's toast. :D
greenmark
Posts: 6265
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:15 pm

Derek27 wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 11:44 pm
Sky News showed the full footage from the CCTV. The guy had his hands in his pockets when he got punched, and the MP carried on punching him while he was on the ground.

When he said to the guy, "You'll never threaten me again", a woman said to him, "You'll never be an MP again". He's toast. :D
When it comes to trial if that's all true, if he's considered previously law abiding he'll escape prison but will be a criminal. So yes. Politically he's toast.
What a stupid thing to do, without some extraordinary mitigating factor he deserves everythiing he gets.
Archery1969
Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am

greenmark wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2024 9:53 am
Derek27 wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2024 11:44 pm
Sky News showed the full footage from the CCTV. The guy had his hands in his pockets when he got punched, and the MP carried on punching him while he was on the ground.

When he said to the guy, "You'll never threaten me again", a woman said to him, "You'll never be an MP again". He's toast. :D
When it comes to trial if that's all true, if he's considered previously law abiding he'll escape prison but will be a criminal. So yes. Politically he's toast.
What a stupid thing to do, without some extraordinary mitigating factor he deserves everythiing he gets.
The average sentence in the UK for ABH is 13 months in prison.

There has to be multiple mitigation issues for you to just get a fine and/or suspended prison sentence. From what I have seen he got no hope of avoiding a custodial sentence.

But yeah, whatever happens, he toast politically. Even the PM said the video is shocking.
User avatar
firlandsfarm
Posts: 3310
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

greenmark wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2024 9:53 am
When it comes to trial if that's all true, if he's considered previously law abiding he'll escape prison but will be a criminal. So yes. Politically he's toast.
What a stupid thing to do, without some extraordinary mitigating factor he deserves everythiing he gets.
So why did those charged in the recent 'riots' with no previous record get prison sentences?
sionascaig
Posts: 1605
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:38 am

firlandsfarm wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2024 11:14 am

So why did those charged in the recent 'riots' with no previous record get prison sentences?
Different charges I think - incitement to riot & rioting - with maybe a few gbh's & assaults thrown in as well?

That tory councillors wife got 2.5yrs for calling on twitter to burn down migrant accommodation - the tweet was only up for 3.5hrs as well...
Post Reply

Return to “Political betting & arguing”