P J 142 Report post Posted May 30 Guido Fawkes, such an unbiased and even handed source of information 😂😂😂😂 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asperity 699 Report post Posted May 30 From the EU’s very own website: In 2017 the UK contributed €10.58 billion to the EU budget (after a rebate of €4.94 billion), and also collected €3.97 billion in customs duties on the EU’s behalf, of which it retained 20%, as an administrative fee. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/external/html/budgetataglance/default_en.html#united_kingdom (10.58 + 4.94 + (3.97 x 0.8))/52 = 360m Euros per week = 317m pounds (current exchange rate). So using a gross figure he was around about right.                1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P J 142 Report post Posted May 30 He lied through his teeth and you know it, more importantly so did the judge who referred it to Crown Court. Lock him up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Davy51 439 Report post Posted May 30 Not to mention Tony's weapons of mass destruction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Confused52 185 Report post Posted May 30 55 minutes ago, P J said: He lied through his teeth and you know it, more importantly so did the judge who referred it to Crown Court. Lock him up. Not yet he hasn't, from the DECISION AND REASONS OF DISTRICT JUDGE M. COLEMAN ….. "This means the proposed defendant will be required to attend this court for a preliminary hearing, and the case will then be sent to the Crown Court for trial. The charges can only be dealt with in the Crown Court." Also the Judge made it clear that there was no implication that the charge had been considered only that there was a case to answer according to the information. Your imputation of guilt is therefore quite improper. Davy, Tony's missing WMDs could have been a much clearer case that that of Boris. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P J 142 Report post Posted May 30 40 minutes ago, Confused52 said: Not yet he hasn't, from the DECISION AND REASONS OF DISTRICT JUDGE M. COLEMAN ….. "This means the proposed defendant will be required to attend this court for a preliminary hearing, and the case will then be sent to the Crown Court for trial. The charges can only be dealt with in the Crown Court." Also the Judge made it clear that there was no implication that the charge had been considered only that there was a case to answer according to the information. Your imputation of guilt is therefore quite improper. Davy, Tony's missing WMDs could have been a much clearer case that that of Boris. Lock him up , crooked Boris lol.  Lock up Blair too Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Confused52 185 Report post Posted June 6 The next instalment starts tomorrow at 0930 when Boris is applying for a judicial review of the actions of Westminster Magistrates Court. Popcorn required. They have found a judge other than Ed Milliband's wife (Justine Thornton) to take the case! 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P J 142 Report post Posted June 7 Lock him up Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asperity 699 Report post Posted June 7 So the High Court has thrown the case against Boris out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Confused52 185 Report post Posted June 7 Indeed so Asp, and not really surprising. We will have to wait to see if the private prosecutor is given leave to appeal or that is the end of the matter, personally I expect the latter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Observer II 214 Report post Posted June 7 Surely BoJo will be entitled to claim costs from the vexatious claimant ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Davy51 439 Report post Posted June 7 At last ,a victory for common sense. Hope the claimants wealthy crowd funding buddies are not too vexatious. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P J 142 Report post Posted June 7 Lock him up Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Confused52 185 Report post Posted June 7 2 hours ago, Observer II said: Surely BoJo will be entitled to claim costs from the vexatious claimant ? So far it looks as if no costs were awarded. The only relief mentioned in what I have found is that the order of the district court was quashed. My understanding is that the costs of the earlier hearing now fall on Mr Ball and each pays his own costs at the Judicial Review. No doubt there will be clarification when the judgement is made available. I have seen analysis that this case can be described as seeking to make a retrospective change to the Common Law by making lying a criminal offence and then apply it to a statement made in 2015.   Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Confused52 185 Report post Posted July 3 The judgement is now online: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/2019ewhc-1709-admin-johnson-v-westminster-mags-final.pdf A damning litany of mistakes by the original District Judge. No body will be locked up P.J. The justices made it clear that lying at elections is not an offence in Statute Law. The action was also vexatious. There was no misconduct in a public office as the common law stands. Shocking that Marcus Ball got this far. Equally shocking that there Johnson made no application for costs so he had to pay his own costs too. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P J 142 Report post Posted July 4 Lock him up Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
