L00b Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Nice argument but even the rabidly Tory press today are interpreting this as a serious problem for the government. Quite simply if Hunt's staff were not following his instructions then his office was out of control and that calls into question the judgement and calibre of the man. He is toast but let us seem him wriggle on the hook a little more please. It's great viewing.It's not an "argument", I1L2T3. It's the apolitical take on the situation by a legally-trained poster There is no question that, politically and in terms of public opinion/perception, Hunt is on a sticky wicket - as your post shows (which is politically-biased and rather fast with its conclusions, as opposed to factually-based ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Vince Cable must be sniggering this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 It's not an "argument", I1L2T3. It's the apolitical take on the situation by a legally-trained poster There is no question that, politically and in terms of public opinion/perception, Hunt is on a sticky wicket - as your post shows (which is politically-biased and rather fast with its conclusions, as opposed to factually-based ). A legally trained poster? Is that you? I'm only politically biased in that I hate this incompetent government and what it is doing to the country. If you read my other posts you will see I don't hold out much hope for the opposition either. The emails are pretty damning, their content not in dispute and as factual as it gets. Every major Tory newspaper has acknowledged the gravity of this but perhaps they don't have any legally trained staff? Ho-hum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 He is toast but let us seem him wriggle on the hook a little more please. It's great viewing. OT but, in the name of public service posting, may I suggest you use maggots or worms next time you go fishing. They wriggle a bit more than toast and, being slightly more dense, are easier to sink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Hunt has demanded that he be allowed to give evidence, under oath, to the enquiry to refute these allegations. Sounds pretty confident to me. Jonathan Aitken sounded pretty confident when he famously proclaimed: If it falls to me to start a fight to cut out the cancer of bent and twisted journalism in our country with the simple sword of truth and the trusty shield of British fair play, so be it. I am ready for the fight. The fight against falsehood and those who peddle it. But he ended up serving time for perjury. Perhaps we ought to wait for Hunt's appearance at the enquiry before we form opinions either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Vince Cable must be sniggering this morning. He'll have been doing that since the Leveson enquiry started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 The emails are pretty damning, their content not in dispute and as factual as it gets.Yes, and I have read a few of them (as reproduced by newspapers), including the infamous 'illegal' one. 'Damning' for all senders/receivers (and particularly Hunt's PR Director, now proven to have breached very many Statutes indeed) of these emails, none of which however emanated from, or was received by, Hunt or Murdoch. As rules of evidence go, the extent of 'factual' is: the identities of the sender & the receivers, the date and time of the message, and the message content. That's it. Unless accompanied by evidence of receipt and evidence of reading by the recipient(s), these do not amount to evidence that the recipient(s) ever received or even read the message, never mind -in context- that Hunt ordered his intermediary to send 1 or more messages and to write what he did. Note also that the content is not always proof itself: in these emails, whatever Hunt/Murdoch are reported (by the msg writer) to have said, is hearsay - the lowest form of 'evidence', often as not disregarded in proceedings (unless later verified in witness statement/testimony/etc. from Hunt/Murdoch themselves, e.g. "yes I said that to the intermediary"). It's not pro-Tory bias. Just objective assessment of the facts at hands. Whereby the "apolitical" qualifier. Every major Tory newspaper has acknowledged the gravity of this but perhaps they don't have any legally trained staff? Ho-hum.You'd be surprised how often (as in, near-permanently) media hacks get legal questions/angles/procedures wrong, in their effor to dumb down their (lay) reporting to the lowest common denominator. I'm quite confident every national newspaper of any bias has legal staff...they just don't write the columns, only check them for liability My point is simple, really: I don't care for politicians, in Gvt or otherwise, and still less for the media baying blood at every opportunity (..to sell more sheets). But, where legal procedure is concerned (of which the Leveson Inquiry is one) I do care for proven facts, and precious little misreporting/misrepresentation is needed to raise my heckles. Ho-hum indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Only if everyone from the previous government goes too. 13 years of courting Murdoch while in office must surely be punished more heavily than 13 weeks? Today is going to be an interesting day with Rupert Murdoch up in front of the Leveson Enquiry. Let's have some daylight on these murky backroom dealings. Don't cloud the issue Tony. You should allow the baying leftie mob to whoop and bare their teeth like a bunch of worked-up baboons, they love it when they can get overly excited about a minor story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Don't cloud the issue Tony. You should allow the baying leftie mob to whoop and bare their teeth like a bunch of worked-up baboons, they love it when they can get overly excited about a minor story. Whilst this issue isn't any where near as serious as dodgy dossiers and the war in Iraq, I doubt the Leveson enquiry would exist if it was really a minor story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Bourne Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 It can only be opportunism from Labour as they are shown time and time again to have no moral foundation and seek power at any price. They would love Hunt to go today as this will take the heat off them when Murdoch senior spills the beans about his relationship with Blair and Brown. True, New Labour were quite happy to suck up to Murdoch when it suited them. Definitely political opportunism on the part of Labour, but it's fun to see the Tories, Labour and Murdoch having the knives out for each other. Childish, but fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.