I1L2T3 Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 I wouldnt be so sure, the way the legal system seems to be working at the moment, who knows what the courts may decided. take for example the 5 people who took the labour party to court to appeal against not being allowed to vote in the party membership election, they won, and the judge basically told the labour party not to waste their time appealing, it was that cut and dried, but they appealed and the appeal judge was someone who had... erm shall we say a good working relationship with Blair...and miraculously they won on appeal. Dont forget, the whole establishment hate Corbyn, and will do anything to beat him, so nothing can be taken for granted Cool. Let them do it. Seriously. Let them show the public what the corporate world flexing it's muscles against the political world really looks like. Let the public have a taste of what a post-Brexit US-UK TTIP on steriods type of deal is going to be like. Bring it on. I'm sure Corbyn will be up for it. ---------- Post added 28-08-2016 at 12:24 ---------- No one is doubting these incidents occur as when I've travelled by virgin I've reserved a seat, I've often found some one sat there. People are doubting corbyns integrity by staging such an incident. ---------- Post added 28-08-2016 at 11:51 ---------- So what if you were on the train being filmed by corbyns pr people and did not want to be filmed. Surely you must have some rights. Can you not read. I am doubting Corbyns's integrity as well. No, citizens filming other citizens on a train have no redress under the DPA. They can decline to be filmed of course. That is their right. Or if they find themselves unexpectedly in a video online then I'm sure they could ask the owner of the film to obscure their faces. But rights under the DPA? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ez8004 Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 no, if Smiffy wins, then it will be by cheating, the vote will have been rigged, and labour would have lost what little credibility they had left Anyone who uses the terms Blairite, tory lite, etc are banned from voting, this purge is going on as we speak, thousands are getting banned..media is being trawled to find people to ban... but people who use the terms trotsky, loony left, nazi storm troopers are fine.... that sounds like a rigged vote to me, doesnt it to you? http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/long-serving-trade-union-leader-8704495 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/john-mcdonnell-labour-hq-rigged-purge-jeremy-corbyn-supporters-a7209996.html Lord Sainsbury donated his money specifically for the Remain campaign. It wasn't for anything else. If you can't see that then you're very narrow minded. Whereas the rules on who can vote and who can't is determined by the Labour Party. It is quite normal to set a threshold on the minimum membership fee and the minimum time a person has been a member of the party in order to be eligible to vote. For example the Tory party sets the fee at £25 and a minimum term of 6 months. The Labour Party has just opted for the same. This is to help filter out the genuine voters versus people trying to join at the last minute to rig the vote. The high courts have already agreed with this view, so what is your problem? Unless you think you're above the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delayed Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 Hornby trolling Corbyn by Twitter OUT NOW - Virgin East Coast Train Pack. Complete with two Mk4 coaches with many empty seats. http://ow.ly/zly4303ByNt https://twitter.com/hornby?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 So what if you were on the train being filmed by corbyns pr people and did not want to be filmed. Surely you must have some rights. Not really. You're in a public place, you have no right to privacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 Not really. You're in a public place, you have no right to privacy. Just a query... Once you've paid to enter somewhere, is it still a "public place" in the meaning of the law? What about, say, a private member's club or similar? If not, wouldn't this apply to a train, where you've paid to enter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santo Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 (edited) This is getting silly now! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37208527 What's with the invasion of privacy complaint? The faces of other passengers on the CCTV are obscured! Edited August 28, 2016 by Santo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 Just a query... Once you've paid to enter somewhere, is it still a "public place" in the meaning of the law? What about, say, a private member's club or similar? If not, wouldn't this apply to a train, where you've paid to enter? The business could ask that someone stop filming, but they have no right to delete footage already taken and no way to stop it being published. ---------- Post added 28-08-2016 at 13:50 ---------- This is getting silly now! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37208527 What's with the invasion of privacy complaint? The faces of other passengers on the CCTV is obscured! They released CCTV of him without his permission, that IS covered by the DPA and they've broken the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santo Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 The business could ask that someone stop filming, but they have no right to delete footage already taken and no way to stop it being published. ---------- Post added 28-08-2016 at 13:50 ---------- They released CCTV of him without his permission, that IS covered by the DPA and they've broken the law. Ahh ok. Would a judge see it that way? Or would it be seen as a reasonable action as right of reply to Corbyn's, as it turned out, false claims? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 The business could ask that someone stop filming, but they have no right to delete footage already taken and no way to stop it being published. ---------- Post added 28-08-2016 at 13:50 ---------- They released CCTV of him without his permission, that IS covered by the DPA and they've broken the law. So are you saying that the train is a "public place", in the meaning of the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted August 28, 2016 Share Posted August 28, 2016 So are you saying that the train is a "public place", in the meaning of the law. Of course it is. If a BBC cameraman was going up and down a carriage filming a background bit for camera, you wouldn't expect half the faces to be blurred out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts