sadoldgit

Couldn’t agree more. Move it to the Midlands too. Also leave Jacob Rees-Mogg behind as the curator. Build a chamber that encourages proper debate rather than the tribalistic yarhooing we get at the moment. The whole thing needs an overhaul from top to bottom from the voting system, the way MPs are policed, the bars, the salary/expenses, accountability…everything basically. If, post Brexit, we want to build a modern, forward looking Britain, we also need to start with kicking out Johnson and his embarrassingly incompetent cabinet.

Pay a fiver a year to be stalked by the resident WUMs who will have even more posts to jump all over? I think not. Anyway, back to Johnson. I don’t see how he is supposedly off the hook just because he managed to swerve more fines. He has already been found guilty of breaking his own law. He lied to Parliament about the parties and he lied to Parliament about attending the parties. He still needs to resign. It sounds like the Grey report could well be watered down too. If he has nothing to worry about, why not publish it in full? As for the focus on Partygate preventing the Government from getting on with other serious matters, what a load of tosh. As if everything comes to a halt just because of one matter. Are we expected to believe that work on the economic crisis, on the Irish border issue and Ukraine have all ground to a halt just because of Johnson’s indiscretions? Johnson clearly hoped that the longer he could drag it out, the more likely people were to get fed up with it. That doesn’t seem to be the case for many.

A grown man stalking another on an Internet forum isn’t particularly edifying behaviour but then he has previous. He did the same to others on the Ugly Inside forum and managed to get himself banned. If he has children I wonder how they would feel about their Dad stalking strangers on Internet forums. Still, he loves the attention and will be enjoying this. I guess it is topical as we have major trials concerning narcissists going on at the moment but Turkish has a way to go before he is in the Amber Heard and Rebekah Vardy league.

Given that we were led to believe that he was fined for the least serious breach of the rules it all sounds very dodgy. I am trying to work out how Johnson managed to attend a number of illegal events where others were fined but he wasn’t?

No more fines for Mr & Mrs Johnson then? Hmmmmmm

They were talking about the inflation rate on the radio today. Apparently it is more like 12%+ for the older generation as they spend a higher proportion of their income on fuel/food, products that have gone up the most. The windfall tax seems a no brainer, but needs to be part of a wider raft of measures to combat the cost of living crisis. A short while ago I was thinking that we could be heading for a major Winter of Discontent, but we are already in the shit big time.

I didn’t say that the previous High Court verdict should be ignored. It is possible that it was wrong though. I don’t know what evidence was presented to prove he physically abused Heard in that case but if it is the same as here then I am amazed the verdict went her way. Apparently a lot of sway was given when she said she would give the proceedings of the divorce settlement ($7m). To charity. The judge said that it showed that she was “a good person.” In the meantime she has not paid a penny to charity and is now saying that she thinks “pledge” and “donate” mean the same thing. In the cross examination her evidence is all over the place. She has even thrown in another accusation of a sexual assault from nowhere. After the alleged headbutt there are pictures of her that show no sign of trauma to the nose that may or may not have been broken (depending on what version of her evidence you read). From what I have seen so far, there is more substantial evidence that Heard assaulted Depp than Depp assaulted Heard. You can believe which version of events you like Egg, I suppose there are still people around who think that O.J. Is innocent because of the initial acquittal.

After you walked the dog perhaps watch the trial? You might find it interesting. It is very easy to make accusations, not so easy to substantiate them in court if you have little to back them up. For example, Depp is supposed to have sexually assaulted Heard with a bottle. If you were her, wouldn’t you file a complaint with the police? Wouldn’t you make sure you went to the hospital and got medical evidence? Wouldn’t you at least get photographic evidence of the damage it must have done? Yet nothing other than her testimony. She has told a number of lies already, why should the court believe her over that? It is a very serious accusation to throw at someone and she doesn’t seem to have any evidence to substantiate her claim. What if she is lying? She didn’t do very well under cross examination today. Perhaps watch tomorrow and at least you will have a more informed opinion.

I haven’t made a judgement but with all due respect to a High Court judge, the only people who know exactly what happened are Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. He has formed an opinion based on the evidence in front of him. It is entirely possible that he made a mistake. This case is being heard by a jury. The jurors will have an opinion as you and I do. They will come to a verdict which you and I might agree with or we might not. Like you I have no idea what Johnny Depp did or didn’t do to her. Unlike you, I have formed an opinion that Amber Heard is not a credible witness. Her evidence is inconsistent and she lies. If you have dealt with DV cases you will know that alleged victims do not always tell the truth. It is possible that Amber Heard has either a narcissistic personality disorder or a borderline personality disorder. If this is the case you will have encountered people with this condition in DV cases. Their version of reality often differs from what you and I understand as the truth. They often create their own reality and end up believing it. Personally I would not trust anything that Amber Heard presents as truth without some solid evidence to back it up.

For starters I wasn’t a Crown Prosecutor. They are lawyers. I am not a lawyer. I didn’t say that Depp was justified in treating her like shit. I said that she played a part in a toxic relationship and that he (apparently) was a victim of domestic violence too. You were suggesting that she alone was the victim. Depending on whose testimony you believe (and hers changes constantly) it would appear to be less straightforward. It is quite possible that they both assaulted each other is it not? It is quite possible that she severed his finger, in which case in is a bit ingenuous to single her out as the victim in this case. If you deal with domestic abuse cases you will know that they often are not that straightforward. If both sides are assaulting each other, it shouldn’t just be assumed that the woman instantly becomes the victim. For example, if he did assault her, what if it was only after a long period of provocation from her. Does he then become the “victim” who was fighting back? You make it sound like she was some poor defenceless little flower who was battered by some evil monster when, if you have been following the latest case, it would seem at the very least that both of them behaved very badly towards each other and both of them treated the other like shit. Having been the victim of domestic assault myself in my first marriage (by my ex wife and my mother in law) I can tell you categorically that no matter what the evidence, it is the man who is immediately treated as if guilty and it is the man who has to fight harder to get his side of the story over. The East Sussex police confirmed to me that they always remove the man from the scene in DV cases when children are involved. The police weren’t interested in what I had to say and allocated a PC to liaise with my ex wife and made sure she was supported.

We had people round last night and she works for Kent County Council and has been working from home since lockdown. K.C.C. Want to keep it going so they can reduce their office space requirements. She says her work is closely monitored and targets set. Guess what. Their productivity has gone up. Working from home doesn’t suit every job or everybody, but the claim that people want to keep on doing because they are “swinging the lead” is crap. There will always be people who don’t pull their weight, in or out of the office, but if managed properly there is no reason why productivity should suffer. It’s the same with the attitude with people going off work with stress. Those with gammon tinted spectacles will always assume it is a con whereas the debilitating effect of mental illness is a huge problem and you only have to look at the suicide rates to see where it can end up if not handled correctly. Wouldn’t it make a pleasant change to share the planet with people whose first instinct isn’t to assume that everyone else is a cheat or freeloader.

I am suggesting that perpetrators of domestic violence are not exclusively male. In this case there is a audio recording of Heard admitting that she hit Depp. That would seem to intimate that he has been victim of domestic violence would it not? He has constantly denied assaulting Heard but clearly the relationship was deeply toxic and neither are going to come out of it with any merit. Are you suggesting that there are different levels of accountability in DV cases? Surely it is equally abhorrent no matter which partner (or both) are dishing it out?

His strange fascination with Thatcher tells you all you need to know. Anyone who refers to that dreadful person as the “great” or “iron lady” and his wife as a “snap dragon” clearly had a thing for dominatrix fantasies.

If you have been following the current Depp v Heard case it sounds like she gave as good as she got.

Why would that be any worse than Prime Minister Boris? He is our “Big Dog.” Where was the meltdown when he was voted in as PM? I grant you though, if he stays in his job and gets re-elected, there will be a meltdown

Badger, our very own Wikipedia 😎

Having worked in the Criminal Justice System at the height of Tory austerity measures, each year we were told to cut staff and close buildings to save x amount of money. We started off as Kent and ended up as Kent/Surrey/Sussex, closing offices in Medway, Maidstone and Guildford. The workload didn’t get any less, in fact it went up, yet we had fewer people to do it so efficiency went down. This was the same for the police, the probation service and the court service. Someone on the radio this morning made a good point. Where has this figure come from? Where are the in-depth plans to show how efficiencies will be made with no deterioration to service? As with the Rwanda scheme, it is just another ill-thought out scheme presented to the gullible as the Tories taking action. It certainly worked for one guy on the phone in programme (was it you Duckie?) who said that most public sector workers didn’t have to work hard for their living and had a cushy number. Towards the end of my time at the CPS more and more people were off sick with stress and mental health issues because they couldn’t cope with the workload. Take nearly 100k people out of public service and it can only put more pressure on services and people already at full stretch. Great, it frees up money to use on other things, likes benefits for the 90,000 people plus who will be jobless.

You were the one calling him a “hero” Batman. As Duckie would say, you are all over the place.

So our caring Cabinet have been covering themselves in glory yet again. Their idea of “levelling up” is to break into various different dialects during an interview and their idea in helping out during the cost of living crisis is to tell us not to shop at Waitrose, to chose supermarket own brands and to spend 30p only on a meal each day. Anyone got any ideas of what you can buy in a supermarket for 30p? Dear God!

And you clearly will carry on defending the indefensible till hell freezes over. The point has been made enough times. I am not making it anymore. You should get a job with the Daily Mail.

How exactly is Starmer a “slimey hypocrite?” As things stand he has not been found guilty of breaking Johnson’s rules. In fact he was investigated and found not guilty of breaking Johnson’s rules. From the “new evidence” that we have seen, Starmer has strong evidence to say that the Mail’s campaign is nothing more than “fluff” (to quote Jacob). If he is found guilty I’m sure you will have a field day but if I were you I wouldn’t put any money on it. The PM of the UK an “ordinary Joe,” really? You don’t think that our PM should uphold higher standards than us mere mortals? Ok, let’s run with it. If an “”ordinary Joe” lies to Parliament they are expected to resign. What makes Johnson so special that he can ignore the rules expected to be adhered to by everyone else? He said there were no parties. There were. He was at some of them himself along with his “bird.” If the PM can’t uphold his own rules, why should anybody else bother? If the PM thinks it’s ok to lie, flout the law, preside over dodgy deals and stand by as millions of £ of public money got wasted or directed into buddies pockets, why should we all stick to the straight and narrow? You are very quick to point the finger at anyone not in your gang, it would make a pleasant change if you actually stopped defending the indefensible. Just watching the news and the government’s latest wheeze to give neighbours a right to block planning applications. To quote you, “dear God.”

Or if you haven’t done anything wrong.

Tell that to the ten of thousands who died or are still ill with long covid. Even superspreader Boris Johnson himself was supposed to be very I’ll with it. I didn’t have you down as one of the MLT brigade Batman. Oh, and as has already been said, Johnson has set a new low for someone in public office and that is probably deeper than the gutter. As well you know this is not about being issued with the equivalent of a parking ticket and you are either deliberately being obtuse or you really are at the level of a Daily Mail reader.

The Mail have managed to do exactly what they set out to do, muddy the waters and pretend that all MPs are the same. It doesn’t matter if Starmer is not charged, mud sticks. It was the same with the nonsense about him being responsible for not charging Savile. People believe because they want to believe it. Johnson has got away with being the worst PM in living memory (so far) because some who voted for him think he is the best of a bad bunch and others don’t want to admit they have made a terrible mistake and keep making excuses for him. Like Trump he has taken this country to a new low and for that alone should be kicked out of office. Whatever you think of Partygate he needs to go because you can’t have the person setting the rules ignoring them. An honourable person would have resigned ages ago once the whiff of scandal was in the air. He doesn’t care about this country. He doesn’t care about his party. He only cares about himself. We now have the unedifying prospect of him desperately clinging on by his fingertips until his party finally find a successor and kick him out. The only upside with him staying in power is that the longer he is in office, the more votes the Tories will lose. The downside of course is that he and his incompetent cabinet will continue to wreck this country (and possibly the union) for the next two years. His legacy will be less of Churchill, more of Mr Bean.

Sadly Duckie you are like this in real life. That Tory mouthpiece the Daily Duckhunter constantly ran a front page splash about “Beergate” right up to and through the local election period. Surprise surprise, when we all should have been talking about and celebrating the kicking the Tories got in the polls, the news finally drops that Durham police are going to re investigate and it’s all about “Beergate” again. Perhaps Duckie, you can tell us why the Met decided to wait until after the local elections before they announce the next round of fines for Johnson and his party party? Nothing dodgy about that 🥴. So Starmer and Rayner have answered your question. Not that Johnson will be rattled because a man without shame cannot be shamed into doing the right thing. Back to my original point which you don’t seem to be able to get your head around. Johnson should resign because he deliberately lied to Parliament about parties and not attending them. At this point in time, when Starmer addressed Parliament he did not lie as the police had investigated the incident and had found no rules had been broken. Starmer now says that he will stand down if he is issued a fine. How can Johnson continue in office when he has broken the same rules multiple times, has already been fined (with his wife) and is likely to be fined again? And before you start to play down these rules, people were dying or seriously ill because of others who did not follow the rules. Your esteemed leader himself was also ill and was also a superspreader. No problem with that? I guess not, despite the slagging you gave to Butch Wilkins when he passed away for drunk driving, your moral compass doesn’t seem to extend to illegal activities carried out by a Tory government that have cost lives and wasted huge sums of money sorting out their business mates. You guys must all be cut from the same cloth. Oh, bye the way. As I have told you several times before, I have only voted Labour twice in my life. This was in the last 2 elections and I did so because they are the second party in my constituency and I want to get the Tory MP out. I know it gives you pleasure to call people by labels and feel free to carry on calling me a “soft Lefty” if it makes you happy, but as usual, you are just talking bollocks. https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/09/labour-says-can-prove-starmer-team-worked-past-1am-beergate-night