oh dear

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 3 of 3 << First < 1 2 3

cryrst The garden of England 26 Oct 18 10.42am
So the payed off 'victims' will now be asked for the money back and have to go through the courts i guess. Im sure that there are people who didnt want it in the public eye whatever it was.if it was! Also their mortgage provider as an example might not give the money back so where would they stand now. Irony would be that green purely could do without the headache of court hearings and if innocent it puts the victims in the spot light. What if it was just a #metoo exercise. I feel that hains motiffs were political due to the present climate of wanting to share out wealth.
Alert a moderator to this post

cryrst

The garden of England 26 Oct 18 10.42am

So the payed off 'victims' will now be asked for the money back and have to go through the courts i guess.
Im sure that there are people who didnt want it in the public eye whatever it was.if it was!
Also their mortgage provider as an example might not give the money back so where would they stand now.
Irony would be that green purely could do without the headache of court hearings and if innocent it puts the victims in the spot light.
What if it was just a #metoo exercise.
I feel that hains motiffs were political due to the present climate of wanting to share out wealth.

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 26 Oct 18 11.02am
Originally posted by cryrst So the payed off 'victims' will now be asked for the money back and have to go through the courts i guess. Im sure that there are people who didnt want it in the public eye whatever it was.if it was! Also their mortgage provider as an example might not give the money back so where would they stand now. Irony would be that green purely could do without the headache of court hearings and if innocent it puts the victims in the spot light. What if it was just a #metoo exercise. I feel that hains motiffs were political due to the present climate of wanting to share out wealth. But he's rich and a Tory so most be guilty the evidence is just one of those awkward formalities. On a serious note Charlie Sheen was forced to go public because he was being blackmailed about his HIV status. There are some despicable people out that and not all of them are rich white billionaires. If you are a public figure some people see you as a pinata so do you face your life being trashed by the tabloids like Sir Cliff or do you try and pay hush money like Sheen. As I said in an earlier post these are complicated scenarios and if the law needs to change then Parliament needs to do with after prober consideration not 1 unelected Lord taking the law into his own hands. One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 26 Oct 18 11.02am

Originally posted by cryrst

But he's rich and a Tory so most be guilty the evidence is just one of those awkward formalities.

On a serious note Charlie Sheen was forced to go public because he was being blackmailed about his HIV status. There are some despicable people out that and not all of them are rich white billionaires.

If you are a public figure some people see you as a pinata so do you face your life being trashed by the tabloids like Sir Cliff or do you try and pay hush money like Sheen.

As I said in an earlier post these are complicated scenarios and if the law needs to change then Parliament needs to do with after prober consideration not 1 unelected Lord taking the law into his own hands.

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 27 Oct 18 9.58am
So the "hero" Peter Hain has financial links to the law firm which is representing the Telegraph. You can read this 2 ways: 1. That Hain is furthering his financial interests under the guise of natural justice in which case he joins a long list of many other politicians. 2. He genuinely did not realise the links which goes to my argument that he shouldn't have spoken out because he doesn't know the full facts and the judges do. All Hain has now done is muddy the waters and generate some sympathy for Green (not much I give you). Interestedly a number of politicians including some Labour have condemned him (Hain). The most telling comment being that the judges have upheld a temporary ban which means that the legal process is still continuing and the Telegraph may yet win their case. So why didn't Hain wait until this process had exhausted itself. One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 27 Oct 18 9.58am

So the "hero" Peter Hain has financial links to the law firm which is representing the Telegraph.

You can read this 2 ways:

1. That Hain is furthering his financial interests under the guise of natural justice in which case he joins a long list of many other politicians.

2. He genuinely did not realise the links which goes to my argument that he shouldn't have spoken out because he doesn't know the full facts and the judges do. All Hain has now done is muddy the waters and generate some sympathy for Green (not much I give you).

Interestedly a number of politicians including some Labour have condemned him (Hain). The most telling comment being that the judges have upheld a temporary ban which means that the legal process is still continuing and the Telegraph may yet win their case. So why didn't Hain wait until this process had exhausted itself.

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 3 of 3 << First < 1 2 3

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

oh dear

Site Map

Sponsors