Category Archives: law

Banana Republic UK

“It’s fuck all to do with me…!


So it’s official then – the country that gave democracy to the world is now officially pursuing the same type of electoral fraud that goes on in your typical third world shithole.

It seems that the intelligent snowflake yoof have worked out that not only can you register in two places and vote twice, but that you can round up polling cards and vote 6 times. Well, OK then. Commit electoral fraud and risk the consequences but for fuck safe be intelligent enough to keep quiet about it! But no! We need to go on Farcebook and Twatter and tell everyone how clever we’ve been.

Except you’re not very clever are you? Because Corbyn bought your vote with ludicrous promises to abolish tuition fees (£4 billion) and refund all your £9,000 a year tuition fees (£10 billion) knowing damned well he couldn’t afford it and now he’s proving just what a bunch of mugs you all were by saying it wasn’t a promise, it was just “something we said we’d try to look at and see what could be done”.

Amazing isn’t it that turnout in some student infested areas was as high as 95%? No? Well, this is amazing – the police are coming under criticism for not investigating cases brought to their attention. Well, it’s all those nasty Tory funding cuts. No resources and all that…

Think about it. May only need to lose 6 seats to lose her majority. The top eight seats where the Tories lost by wafer thin margins seems to be in heavily student occupied constituencies. In Kensington, they lost by 20 votes. That would only take 20 people to vote twice to swing it.

Nobody is going to be bold enough to suggest that Labour orchestrated it but they’re sure as hell not going to do much to prevent it or investigate it are they?

The yoof have been played for bunch of mugs whose votes were bought by promises not worth the paper they weren’t written on – and this country has been reduced to the status of banana republic. It’s bloody shameful – even if it’s not that much of a surprise to some of us…

Advertisements

Well, there’s a surprise…!

Supreme court judges arrive in London to deliver their verdict...

Supreme court judges arrive in London to deliver their verdict…

Actually, it wasn’t a surprise at all was it? It was, however, a spectacular waste of time, effort and money…

Everybody knew well in advance that the Supreme Court would reject the Government’s appeal on triggering Article 50. It was probably the UK’s worst kept secret. So what can we take away from it?

Well, it was a split decision so interestingly not all of the learned judges agreed. That aside, the government will now have to introduce a bill to parliament and take a vote on it. Labour, of course, want to obfuscate by banging on about detailed plans and protecting workers rights whilst at the same time knowing damn well they ain’t going to get detail and that nobody is suggesting that there will be any erosion of workers’ rights. And in any case does anyone know what Jeremy Corbyn’s position on all this is anyway?

David Davies’ statement on all this was simple : “It will be a very short bill!”

The only good thing to come out of all this is the ruling by the Supreme Court that the devolved assemblies in Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland have no power over the UK government and cannot hold it to ransom. Sure, Westminster will listen to them but I’d like to be a fly on the wall in Holyrood when Sturgeon is told that there’s bugger all she can do to frustrate Westminster.

For me the whole sorry farce is worth it for that moment alone…

This is democracy?

brexit-high-court-1
Can anyone explain to exactly why we held a referendum last June if we’re going to ignore it? And can anyone explain to me why the hell the courts are getting involved in frustrating a clear popular mandate?

This morning the High Court decided that the Prime Minister cannot invoke Article 50 without a vote in Parliament. But this is clearly nonsense because Parliament already had a vote when it passed the legislation to authorise a referendum, so other than the expectation that we would do what we were told and vote remain why the hell did they allow a referendum in the first place.

Clearly the courts are implicit in frustrating the democratically expressed will of the majority of the electorate. So why did they do it?

Well, call me suspicious but I’m just a little concerned that the chairman of the judges and the country’s most senior judge Lord Chief Justice Baron Thomas is a founder of the European Law Institute which aims to harmonise law across the EU. The cynical amongst us might suspect that this doesn’t exactly make him unbiased?

All this could have been avoided if the government had stopped pissing about and invoked Article 50 before all this got to court.

So putting all that aside, what next? The appeal goes to the Supreme Court in December. More taxpayers money flushed down the toilet. If May loses that then the next move will be a Commons vote in some form or other.

Will the Commons defy the will of the electorate? Frankly, I wouldn’t put it past them. They’re that arrogant, stupid and unaccountable. But if they do then expect an early General Election, probably next February.

And the most likely result would be to return a Conservative government with an increased majority.

So what’s the bloody point of all this pissing about and why the hell didn’t we just get on with it in the first place?…

Cunts on bikes

images
We all moan a lot about cyclists ignoring the rules of the road and basically being inconsiderate and dangerous bastards, but recently we’ve had right bloody idiots on our local pseudo-motorway which leads me to reflect on just how stupid motorcyclists can be as well…

The first was a bloke going home from work at 135mph because he’d ‘had a shit day and just wanted to get home as soon as possible’. Amazingly, he told the local magistrate just that in mitigation and clearly the crusty old sod fell for it because he got a 3 month ban and a £50 fine. The police are, needless to say, outraged that he got off so lightly but have no grounds for appealing the sentence. Personally I think a 12 month ban and a £500 fine would have been more in order.

Then just to rub salt in the wound, another guy was caught doing 103mph in a 40mph limit while a 56 year old biker was clocked at 160mph on the A14 in Cambridgeshire. Frankly anyone doing 100mph in a built up area should be banned for years, not 16 weeks. And 160mph on the A14 is suicidal – especially as the rider was old enough to know better.

I got prosecuted when I was in my 20s when I was overtaking a car in the 30 limit and the bloke turned right without signalling. That cost me a broken leg from which I still have the scars. It was bad luck on my part but because I was doing more than 30, I was done for driving without due care. Proportionally, the fine was more than any of these idiots got.

There’s a lot more traffic now than then. It’s a sight more dangerous and anyone driving like this is asking to get killed. The problem is that they’ll take some poor innocent sod with them – and when they do, it will be partly the fault of the idiot magistrates who let people like this off so lightly….

The blame game

_81354005_lepp_lane_sideview1
I probably won’t be very popular for writing this, but since when did that ever stop me. I’m going to write about the Hillsborough verdict…

15 April 1989. What were you doing on 15 April 1989? Can you remember because I can’t. So can we really expect crystal clear recollections about that fateful day when 96 people died? Especially when you’re required to recount them at an inquest?

The original inquest recorded a verdict of accidental death. Subsequent investigations revealed that the police had been somewhat economical with the truth and the words ‘cover up’ were mentioned. Certainly it seems that they were covering their backsides and there’s no excuse for that. But does it makes the deaths any less misfortune? Nobody set out that day to deliberately kill 96 people.

The officer in charge is clearly traumatised by the events of that day. PTSD has struck him down and he’s very frank about how remorseful he feels that he couldn’t have done better. But we can all be wise after the event. Does that mean he should be prosecuted for his actions? Or should he be pitied for the witch hunt to find somebody to blame?

The culture of the 21st century is very different to that of 1989. We live in a world of ambulance chasing lawyers and the inherited culture of America where nothing is ever an accident and somebody has to be blamed. If we walk down the street and trip over a paving stone then it’s not our fault for not looking where we’re going. It’s the fault of the council for not maintaining the pavement or the poor sod who laid the stone. It’s always somebody else’s fault.

And that’s what I find so unpalatable about the Hillsborough verdict. Even the jury couldn’t agree more a more than 7-2 majority verdict of unlawful killing. Reading the report, there were many factors involved and many lessons to be learnt from that day. And it’s not so much that we have to wheedle out somebody to blame, but the fact that the supporters themselves are exonerated of any part they played.

After all, they were there too. But remember – in 2016, it’s always somebody else’s fault…