Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 401 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, full colour, in-depth coverage from the grassroots through to the international game.
Click here for the digital edition or just download the Rugby League World app from Apple Newsstand or Google Play now.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 401
/ View a Gallery of all our previous 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 401
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Brooks, Coulson et al


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

Poll: Will they be convicted? (4 member(s) have cast votes)

Simple choice really....

  1. Yes (1 votes [25.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 25.00%

  2. No (3 votes [75.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 75.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 2,275 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 12:07 PM

So the trial begins.

 

It's expected to last for up to six months.

 

Does anyone think there'll be convictions or that the best lawyers that money can buy will win the day (or simply that they're innocent).

 

My guess is that the trial will disappear up its own backside in legal argument and collapse.


Edited by Larry the Leit, 30 October 2013 - 12:07 PM.


#2 Futtocks

Futtocks
  • Coach
  • 20,075 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 12:10 PM

The defendants are rich enough to afford one of those convenient diseases which means they can't go to jail but which completely clears up as soon as they're safe.


A mind is like a parachute. It doesn’t work if it isn’t open. Frank Zappa (1940 - 1993)


#3 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,831 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 12:16 PM

Too much Guinness, IIRC! 



#4 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 9,729 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 12:40 PM

Apparently, it's not the imprisonment that's bothering anyone ... only small tarriffs can be applied. It's the colossal fine that Murdoch might have to face.


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#5 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,725 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 12:54 PM

Please be aware that this case is now sub-judice meaning that you have to be very careful about what you say.  You CAN discuss the case as it goes but you must be absolutely sure that your comment would stand up against both a guilty and not guilty verdict.  If your comment is incompatible with either verdict then just don't bother posting it as you'll have wasted your time when I just delete it.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#6 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 2,275 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 03:28 PM

Please be aware that this case is now sub-judice meaning that you have to be very careful about what you say.  You CAN discuss the case as it goes but you must be absolutely sure that your comment would stand up against both a guilty and not guilty verdict.  If your comment is incompatible with either verdict then just don't bother posting it as you'll have wasted your time when I just delete it.

 

I'm pretty sure that the press will make sure that it gets enough coverage so that they can challenge the neutrality of the jury if they need to.

 

I'm not really concerned about the AOB section of one of the best RL forums coming under scrutiny.


Edited by Larry the Leit, 30 October 2013 - 03:29 PM.


#7 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,725 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 06:04 PM

If trial by media were in place then surely we'd be expecting a guilty verdict going by the precedents set with the Shoesmith reporting of "in charge = guilty"


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#8 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,511 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 06:12 PM

I believe they're guilty as sin, but won't be holding my breath for a conviction. :(
"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#9 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,831 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 10:10 PM

If trial by media were in place then surely we'd be expecting a guilty verdict going by the precedents set with the Shoesmith reporting of "in charge = guilty"

 

Quite so.On the same basis, Brooks will then be awarded around £20 million in compensation. ..out of your taxes.  You've always wanted to pay more tax in any case.

 

Read all of the Independent's report: http://www.independe...ks-8913689.html


Edited by JohnM, 30 October 2013 - 10:19 PM.


#10 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,511 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 03:09 PM

Looks like things will be turning nasty pretty quickly. Funny how this never made the tabloids at the time; thought this sort of thing would have been right up their street. :rolleyes:


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#11 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 9,729 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 03:51 PM

If the two defendants did have a six-year affair, then Wikipedia timescales indicate that: 

- Rebekah Brooks  married Ross Kemp whilst still having an ongoing affair with Andy Coulson.

 - Andy Coulson married his wife whilst still having an ongoing affair with Rebekah Brooks.

 

Hard to now see them having any success with going into the witness box and trying to profess personal integrity.


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#12 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,831 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 04:24 PM

The prosecution are making their case at the moment. Thus the  contents of the letter, which are plain enough though there seems to be no proof it was ever posted, never mind even received, will naturally be represented in a way that assists the prosecution case. It will of course be more than interesting to hear the defence case in due course.

 

Mind you, Mr Edis told jurors he was not revealing the affair to deliberately intrude into their privacy or to make a "moral judgment".   Is  personal integrity  not included?

 

One thing, though..I bet Private Eye sales soar!  This is going to run and run.   To find out more about the person the left wing press, Private Eye and  this forum loves to hate, see http://en.wikipedia..../Rebekah_Brooks

 

PS. She's from Warrington.


Edited by JohnM, 31 October 2013 - 04:33 PM.


#13 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 9,729 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 05:10 PM


 

PS. She's from Warrington.

 

Then it's no surprise that she can't spell 'Rebecca'.

 

;)


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#14 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,511 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 05:45 PM

PS. She's from Warrington.

 

 

Then it's no surprise that she can't spell 'Rebecca'.

 

;)

 

She grew up in Daresbury which is more Runcorn than Warrington and is quite posh (for that part of the world) being semi-rural Cheshire. :)


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#15 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,831 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 06:03 PM

Anyone on here went to  Appleton Hall High School?   it'll only come out at the trial so you might as well own up now.!



#16 Red Devils PAW

Red Devils PAW
  • Players
  • 68 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 08:26 PM

If trial by media were in place then surely we'd be expecting a guilty verdict going by the precedents set with the Shoesmith reporting of "in charge = guilty"

  I think the difference is that Shoesmith was sacked by a Nu Labour person nescient of the laws in place,whereas this situation is before 12 good and true persons.

  Both,of course,costing the tax payers a considerable sum of money.

  I am unable to cast a vote as it may be the named persons are found guilty of some charges and not on other charges.

  Is the vote in place to cover any or all charges against them ?

  I don't suppose it is worth mentioning that Ross Kemp is the son of a now retired high ranking Met police officer ? Just coincidence no doubt.


Ability is what you're capable of doing. Motivation determines what you do. Attitude determines how well you do it


#17 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 2,275 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 08:27 AM

If the two defendants did have a six-year affair, then Wikipedia timescales indicate that: 

- Rebekah Brooks  married Ross Kemp whilst still having an ongoing affair with Andy Coulson.

 - Andy Coulson married his wife whilst still having an ongoing affair with Rebekah Brooks.

 

Hard to now see them having any success with going into the witness box and trying to profess personal integrity.

 

They seem like lovely people if the evidence presented thus far is true.



#18 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 9,729 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 09:58 AM

The legal establishment (the Government?) has got top performers in to progress this case.

 

http://www.theguardi...-andrew-edis-qc


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users