Tory Chief Whip 'Plebgate' Thread

[Anna Glypta]

Conversly, consider the government sticking the boot into most of the UK populace. The will of public will never be broken simply because there are more of them.

 

Whatever happens, the minister should not have done what he did.

 

I'm not really sure what he did any more if he did anything at all. There is only one indisputable fact in all this and that is a policeman who gave evidence of what went on lied. That is a clear fact as he simply wasn't there to witness what he claims he saw and heard. And if you cannot believe what the police are saying it seems you cannot be sure of anything in this affair. Unless you are desperate to.

[alchresearch]

Conversly, consider the government sticking the boot into most of the UK populace.

 

"Most" - Really? 59% according to the latest YouGov survey:

 

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/rvmbsskt1a/YG-Archives-Pol-Trackers-Approval-181212.pdf

 

Which is just over half.

[LeMaquis]

"Most" - Really? 59% according to the latest YouGov survey:

 

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/rvmbsskt1a/YG-Archives-Pol-Trackers-Approval-181212.pdf

 

Which is just over half.

 

But isn't over half most?

[WeX]

I'm not really sure what he did any more if he did anything at all. There is only one indisputable fact in all this and that is a policeman who gave evidence of what went on lied. That is a clear fact as he simply wasn't there to witness what he claims he saw and heard. And if you cannot believe what the police are saying it seems you cannot be sure of anything in this affair. Unless you are desperate to.

 

Mecky wants this to be true because its a tory MP that's all, you wont convince him of anything even if irrefutable evidence is presented to counter his position. Its a tory mp and so everything is bad. that's the mentality of the guy.

 

---------- Post added 19-12-2012 at 13:48 ----------

 

But isn't over half most?

 

that's my understanding of the word most. it means the greatest in number.

[SevenRivers]

I'm confused as to why the police feel they would need an independent witness to backup what they've put in their notebooks, unless they made it up and tried to back it up further with a false witness. Throws into doubt whether we can believe the police notes "taken on the night".

[Jeffrey Shaw]

calling someone a pleb is not illegal

No. Anyway, there is no such word! The Latin plebs (meaning 'people') is plural only and cannot be ensingularised.

[I1L2T3]

I'm confused as to why the police feel they would need an independent witness to backup what they've put in their notebooks, unless they made it up and tried to back it up further with a false witness. Throws into doubt whether we can believe the police notes "taken on the night".

 

As I mentioned earlier there are two separate stories.

 

1. The incident recorded in the log book. That story is clear and has not changed.

 

2. The corroborating story (not police evidence) supplied to the Tory deputy chief whip by an off-duty police officer.

 

The two stories have been cleverly merged together. The police were never relying on an independent witness. In a situation where two police officers saw and recorded the same event they wouldn't need another witness.

 

---------- Post added 19-12-2012 at 16:55 ----------

 

No. Anyway, there is no such word! The Latin plebs (meaning 'people') is plural only and cannot be ensingularised.

 

As somebody interested in the law Jeffrey would you not say that calling somebody any word at all as part of a sentence littered with expletives and delivered in an aggressive way might be at least on the point of breaking the law?

[Anna Glypta]

As I mentioned earlier there are two separate stories.

 

1. The incident recorded in the log book. That story is clear and has not changed.

 

2. The corroborating story (not police evidence) supplied to the Tory deputy chief whip by an off-duty police officer.

 

The two stories have been cleverly merged together. The police were never relying on an independent witness. In a situation where two police officers saw and recorded the same event they wouldn't need another witness.

 

---------- Post added 19-12-2012 at 16:55 ----------

 

 

As somebody interested in the law Jeffrey would you not say that calling somebody any word at all as part of a sentence littered with expletives and delivered in an aggressive way might be at least on the point of breaking the law?

 

I'm not sure that the original version of the police holds water either. In that statement it was alleged that there was a crowd of civilians gathered at the gate who witnessed the event and heard the conversations. Then conveniently a member of the public comes forward to corroborate this.

This has all started to fall apart when it turns out this convenient member of the public was also a police officer who wasn’t even there. Now the CCTV shows that these members of the public mentioned in the police statement weren’t there either. All of a sudden things are unravelling like they did when that Labour MP claimed the Savile sex abuse involved folk at no10. So far McAlpine has received over £300K in damages from folk who repeated his alegations and there is likely to be more to come.

[Good mood]

Why did the police prevent him from riding his bicycle through the gates anyway??

[truman]

 

2. The corroborating story (not police evidence) supplied to the Tory deputy chief whip by an off-duty police officer.

 

 

Who it appears wasn't even there.....