josephbloggs

I agree, that's what was happening in your head.

He went to jail for Contempt of Court. And he plead guilty. He isn't persecuted.

Your pal is an idiot. Why take the risk? Rabies has a 100% death rate. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c98wyllp170o

Type on the form and print is fine. Just leave the signature and sign in front of them on the day (not sure if that is strictly necessary but no harm in it - I always sign in front of them)

He did not have his head stamped on by a policeman which was the first video that came to light and caused complaints about police excessive force. Therefore his case did not get referred to the IOPC or require an investigation by GMP. He immediately plead guilty and was therefore dealt with by a magistrates court who could quickly pass sentence, it did not go to a full criminal trial. So no involvement of the CPS to gather evidence over a period of weeks, no scheduling of a complex criminal case in to an overloaded criminal justice system. If you punch someone in a pub you will generally be seen by a magistrate the next day, plead guilty, accept your punishment, job done. Do you really not understand the differences in the two cases? Really?? I don't understand how you can refuse to see what is so clearly obvious - the cases could not be more different.

Yeah, I would expect better. I hope it was as you say. If it was it was genius and proves the point perfectly as numerous people got agitated by it and will probably tell others and that is how false information spreads. No one comes back to it to look for corrections, the seed is sown. Not one other person thought to do an independent check, not one, they just believed the Tik Tok video. Quite depressing really.

I have made reasoned points, over and over again, you ignore all of them and this is where we end up. Says it all. I'm done.

You really don't get it do you. You really think a judge would accept a brief video clip without any other evidence or investigation? Is that how you think the criminal prosecution and crown court work? It would be thrown out immediately. I am only glad you work nowhere near our legal system. Jeez, this is hard going.

I agree no point in having a discussion anymore. I have consistently explained in detail how the process works and why it took the time it did and what the complexities of the case were and why due process takes time and why every case should follow it no matter what - it is the pillar of any functioning justice system. You have ignored them all and just posted a foghorn, political grandstanding announcement full of conjecture and imagined scenarios which didn't even come to pass.

I was drawing a parallel. I know you only draw with crayons, so never mind.

So you think the CPS just glance at a video clip and make a decision? Is that how flimsy you want their cases to be? Imagine how many people would get away with their crimes if the CPS just went "saw a ten second video clip on YouTube, prosecute. Next!" Complete fantasy land stuff. I have explained the due process in this case twice now, I am not going to do it a third time for you to ignore again. I have been doing it since the beginning too. Investigations done, evidence seemingly water-tight, complaints against the police dismissed, now in a criminal trial after which I fully expect to see a guilty verdict and jail time. If the legal process went "watch video clip, ignore all inquiries and counter complaints, don't bother with witness interviews or cross checking of evidence, send for immediate prosecution" they would be out already on a technicality or would have had their case dismissed by any decent lawyer. I thought you were all for law and order, no?

Ha ha ha. Hilarious. Foghorning. Nothing more, nothing less. Foghorn number two even makes it up as he goes along, saying it is under investigation by the IOPC (which it was) and that perhaps might mean the CPS don't prosecute which would blah blah blah, and if they don't prosecute we will crowd fund a private prosecution (not pay for it themselves even though Farage has got millions of pounds worth of your donations). No evidence that the CPS won't prosecute, just conjecture, what ifs, imagined scenarios, and nonsense. A it like this forum. Oh, erm, the CPS did prosecute after due process. So this was showboating, foghorning, and based on no reasoned evidence, just "what if, if they don't, blah blah". Political showboating which is all Farage is capable of. They did. The trial is ongoing. Thank you.

So no link to the legal blogs then?

Goalposts moving again. All I read on here was "he broke a policewoman's nose". No mention of Starbucks until today. Anyway, I'll bow out now, I know how the criminal justice system works, especially when three agencies are involved. If you don't want to read it or take it in then that's up to you, discussions are impossible. It was all a cover up until Foghorn Farage got involved. And Yaxley-Lennon personally came to the policewoman's aid. I see the light now.

Jeez, how dense can you be? I asked for evidence that Farage had anything to do with the prosecution moving forward. He didn't, it was already moving through the system. You gave a link to him foghorning his mouth off - jumping on a bandwagon, nothing more nothing less. I don't disagree that he jumped on a bandwagon and got some self serving publicity for his fanboys to lap up, I vehemently disagree his spouting had any influence over anything - of course it didn't. But give him his due, he knows when and where to get his foghorn out.

Oooo, we have a legal blog reader! Can you share a link to these legal discussions please? I'll copy and paste my other reply and then maybe you can tell me which parts of it the legal blog people say is false. Leal blogs, right? 1. It was a complex case with multiple parties involved, needing thorough investigations by Greater Manchester Police (GMP), the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). Yes, partly due to the complaints against the police violence, which was rightfully eventually dismissed. 2. Because there were accusations of police brutality that needed to be investigated, and there are racial/political undertones the CPS needed to go through all the evidence to make sure it was completely watertight, legally sound, defensible in court and there was no wriggle room for them to get out of it - surely that's a good thing? Or would you rather they rushed it through, there are holes their lawyers can exploit and they get out of it via a loophole or a mistake in evidence collection just to satisfy the braying mob by rushing things? 3. They were charged in December, less than five months after their arrest. That is not unusual for a complex case with multiple agencies and complaints and a vast array of evidence to be examined. It is not a simple open and shut case no matter what you think. 4. They plead not guilty which meant it needs a criminal trial and has to be scheduled in to the criminal justice system which always has a significant backlog of cases. And this is expected to be a 3-4 week trial, no small matter. All of the above is verifiable, usual, and the way the course of justice goes, especially in a sensitive case such as this. If the evidence is not absolutely nailed down before charges are brought and they get off on a technicality what do you think would happen? Riots on the streets probably, so let them do their jobs. What do your legal blogs say exactly?

The straight line acceleration is ok, just everything else about it is not - especially for the money. For close to £100k I want much much more.

That is all correct. And then the CPS has to go through all the evidence supplied and decide if it will stand up in a court of law, be defensible, and stand up to scrutiny before they send it for prosecution.

Ignore the grunters. It diminishes your otherwise good points when you start complaining about emojis.

Ok, I will dig out links of how the criminal justice system works. Maybe you can dig out links of how this was "buried" in case Muslims got offended and how Farage had anything to do with the case.

Isn't this thread and discussion about the trial of the Manchester airport attackers??

No, again that is imagined. No military vehicles because of several reasons, none of which was offending muslims or minorities. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/armed-forces-day-military-equipment-banned-city-york-labour-b2783453.html Are you in favour of the military parades and hands on military demonstrations during Children's Day in Thailand?

Prosecutions are decided by the CPS, not the police.

Okey Dokey. My other post explaining the process and why your beliefs are misguided probably had too many words or facts for you to read. Sorry about that. Back to your imaginary scenarios that live in your head and not in the criminal justice system.

Nonsense - ignorant nonsense at that.