If the outcome is yet to be decided - because they are deliberating and cojitating - then the statement is likely to read : "man turns up for meeting".
We got three points deducted per transgression, reduced to 2 because Parsons put his hands up quicker than the French facing a German soldier.
They should get a 3 point deduction per transgression, giving them a total deduction of 342 points. It's only fair.
The question you added in your edit after I quoted you?
Absolutely, yes. That's exactly what Mrs WSS has done having gained ILR over 25 years ago.
You've previously mentioned you are a Reform supporter. Do you agree that those that have integrated into society, paid their taxes, worked and not had a penny in benefits should have their ILR cancelled?
And then came back so you could moan and whine about everything that's wrong with the country rather than staying in the land of milk and honey to which you were so cordially invited.
I assume you left to earn more money elsewhere? Wouldn't that make you one of those dirty, vile, raping, murdering economic immigrants that you so despise?
He'll also see what proof they've got. I reckon they've really got their work cut out to prove he did it!
Although pleading not guilty to a crime that everyone knows you've committed isn't going to make sure you get a lower sentence when the decision is made!
Not really. From the bullet points of Parson's statement the other day, he states it is likely to be done within a month, assuming we don't take up the option to appeal.
No news, in this case, is literally no news.