PM candidate Boris Johnson to face court over Brexit comments

[sirineou]

17 hours ago, geoffbezoz said:

Oh dear and if this goes to a conclusion then 100s if not 1000's of other politicians and their spin doctors will also face court action for telling lies.

As they should.

[dick dasterdly]

I'm looking forward to the numerous court cases against lying/misleading politicians and their supporters ????!

 

I'm trying to take this seriously as it is serious, BUT - the only court case is against Boris ??????!!

[BritManToo]

Just now, dick dasterdly said:

I'm looking forward to the numerous court cases against lying/misleading politicians and their supporters ????!

 

I'm trying to take this seriously as it is serious, BUT - the only court case is against Boris ??????!!

Tony Blair killed thousands looking for WMDs that never existed.

Glad to hear he'll be getting his just desserts in the near future.

[dick dasterdly]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Except this allegations do not relate to Alexander Boris (man of the people) de Pfefll Johnson’s Parliamentary dilutes.

 

9 minutes ago, blazes said:

 

Phew, this easily beats all former "confusions" that Chomper usually suffers from.

 

I would love to have a sip of that (really excellent) Scotch that seems to stimulate this intellectual activity.

 

I'm impressed that you understood his post.  It made no sense at all to me!

[blazes]

1 minute ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

I'm impressed that you understood his post.  It made no sense at all to me!

 

Erm, just to be clear.....I could make neither head nor tail of Chomper's latest effusion.

[Basil B]

I think this will get buried, I assume Marcus Ball and other have already reported politicians of both camps for lying or misleading the public in the run up to the Brexit Referendum to the relevant bodies, and nothing was done, probably because there are long standing instructions going back many governments where it was felt that investigating and prosecuting was not in the public interest as virtually every politician  could be subject to a multitude of politically motivated spurious claims.

 

I suspect that the Director of Public Prosecutions will soon step in and take over the case and it will then be forwarded to the Crown Prosecution Service who will after many weeks say there is insufficient evidence or it is not in the public interest to prosecute. 

Quote

The right to bring private prosecutions is preserved by section 6(1) of the Prosecution of Offences Act (POA) 1985. There are, however, some limitations:

• the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has power under section 6(2) POA 1985 to take over private prosecutions;
• in some cases, the private prosecutor must seek the consent of the Attorney General or of the DPP before the commencement of proceedings.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/private-prosecutions

 

The best we can hope for is that when Brexit is done and dusted there is an inquiry into those that hold public office Lying or making misleading statements and there be a body set up to investigate and has the power to bar offenders from public office, I am not just talking politicians of all tiers of government but also civil servants too: including Whitehall mandarins, Local government officials, police officers, those on public bodies, even judges, deliberate lying does happen but more often facts are deliberately put in such away as to mislead.

[Chomper Higgot]

49 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I'm looking forward to the numerous court cases against lying/misleading politicians and their supporters ????!

 

I'm trying to take this seriously as it is serious, BUT - the only court case is against Boris ??????!!

Well it’s a start.

[candide]

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

The message was "We send the EU 350 million a week". That is true. It is also true that they send 100 million back.

No. It does not work like that. UK directly pays the net contribution. There is no money sent back later.

Only subsidies are sent back.

[phil2407]

The UK's EU membership fee

Published: 3rd Dec 2018

The UK pays more into the EU budget than it gets back.

In 2017 the UK government paid £13 billion to the EU budget, and EU spending on the UK was forecast to be £4 billion. So the UK’s ‘net contribution’ was estimated at nearly £9 billion.

 

[Baerboxer]

18 hours ago, geoffbezoz said:

Oh dear and if this goes to a conclusion then 100s if not 1000's of other politicians and their spin doctors will also face court action for telling lies. If found guilty then the government of the day, whomever that may be by then , IMHO should launch an enquiry into why the British education system is so poor it produced 17 million people who were unable to grasp fact from fiction.

 

Farage will be off to the US or Germany if Boris is found guilty! Probably keeps a bag packed 555!

[Krataiboy]

18 hours ago, evadgib said:

Like only one side were at it?

Absolutely. What about all those politicians, econonomists and other Remainers who told whoppers as part of the pathetic Project Fear campaign? 

 

If Boris is forced to face the music for being economical with the truth, it's only fair that Cameron, Osborne and their mendacious Remainer cohorts should get the same treatment

 

https://order-order.com/2016/10/27/project-fear-predictions-full

[Kwasaki]

19 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

District Judge Margot Coleman said the allegations were not proven and she had made no finding of fact, but said Johnson should face trial.

Another remainer or friend of TM no doubt. ????

[Kwasaki]

1 hour ago, phil2407 said:

The UK's EU membership fee

Published: 3rd Dec 2018

The UK pays more into the EU budget than it gets back.

In 2017 the UK government paid £13 billion to the EU budget, and EU spending on the UK was forecast to be £4 billion. So the UK’s ‘net contribution’ was estimated at nearly £9 billion.

 

Another from Full Facts.

Treasury figures clearly show Britain’s EU budget rebate last year was £4.9bn. Deduct that from £17.8bn and you get £12.9bn – or £248m a week. This is the sum now recognized by the independent fact-checking organisation Full Facts.

 

Boris was close. ????

[CharlieH]

Reported troll comment removed.

 

Post with colored highlight removed.

[sanemax]

Yes, the figures may have been misleading .

But the point made was true .

The UK pays alot of money per week to the E.U.

That was the main point and its really not such a big deal as to whether it was 250 or 350M

Would any Brexit voters have voted Remain , had the figure 250 M been on the bus ?

It would have made no difference .

I could understand people disputing the figure and taking legal action , had the figure been completely false , had the U.K actually received more money back from the E.U , more than what it gave .

  Yes, the figure is disputable , but the point made was a true and correct point

[Loiner]

5 hours ago, Thaifriends said:

Blondie is an arrogant big mouth

Nah, look at the photo - Marcus Ball has got dark hair. Full of himself and BS. He claims he especially hates politicians who lie, so that would be most of them. He also says its got nothing to do with frustrating Brexit, but that is his own lie. Attempting to prosecute the next PM, who will have to deliver Brexit, is what it's all about. Well, that plus bit of a scam for himself. The man is a Conman and the whole Remainer argument is a con on the whole of the UK. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7084115/GUY-ADAMS-man-took-24-000-fighting-fund-pay-himself.html

 

Edited May 30, 2019 by metisdead
Edited as per fair use policy.

[Nigel Garvie]

1 hour ago, sanemax said:

Yes, the figures may have been misleading .

But the point made was true .

The UK pays alot of money per week to the E.U.

That was the main point and its really not such a big deal as to whether it was 250 or 350M

Would any Brexit voters have voted Remain , had the figure 250 M been on the bus ?

It would have made no difference .

I could understand people disputing the figure and taking legal action , had the figure been completely false , had the U.K actually received more money back from the E.U , more than what it gave .

  Yes, the figure is disputable , but the point made was a true and correct point

Wow 100 M a week is not a big deal, how many hospitals and schools does that add up to a year. Anyway this talk about 250 M is way off the mark, as we get a large amount back in direct subsidies. Also the trade benefit of having tariff free access to the largest market in the world is vast compared with what we pay in. Why do you think Germany, France etc etc were keen to expand the EU, it meant a bigger market for everyone's goods. Trade is the greatest contributor to world prosperity - and if I might quote Molesworth "As evry ful kno".

[dunroaming]

19 hours ago, Thairealist said:

Amazingly, this is headline news on the BBC, but not on other news agencies. And some people still continue to think we 

Live in an open and genuine Democracy 

Plus Channel 4 news and ITV but let's not split hairs.

  

This is a witch hunt for Johnson.  No question about that. Boris wasn't the only person on the bus spouting the lies.  Admittedly he was the loudest and most consistent but the others all chipped in at every opportunity.  You can't compare it to Liam Fox and "this will be the easiest deal of all time" because that was an opinion.  Johnson presented this as fact which is why it will be taken more seriously.  However I say again, it is a witch hunt to question whether you can believe anything that Johnson says

[sanemax]

10 minutes ago, Nigel Garvie said:

Wow 100 M a week is not a big deal, how many hospitals and schools does that add up to a year. 

It is a lot of money in its own right , but that wasnt the point .

The point was that how many Brexit voters would have changed their vote to Remain , had the figure been 250 M ?

   Not forgetting that people voted for a variety of reasons and not just because of the bus slogan .

   Was it a decisive element in peoples voting decision or irrelevant ?

[stevenl]

6 minutes ago, sanemax said:

It is a lot of money in its own right , but that wasnt the point .

The point was that how many Brexit voters would have changed their vote to Remain , had the figure been 250 M ?

   Not forgetting that people voted for a variety of reasons and not just because of the bus slogan .

   Was it a decisive element in peoples voting decision or irrelevant ?

If thought to be irrelevant why did he say it?

 

As I said earlier, I don't think the case has any merit, but denying that claims like this had effect don't make much sense.

Edited May 30, 2019 by stevenl

[sanemax]

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

If thought to be irrelevant why did he say it?

Dont just look at one word and reply to that one word .

Read the whole post and take all the other words into consideration 

[geoffbezoz]

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

It is a lot of money in its own right , but that wasnt the point .

The point was that how many Brexit voters would have changed their vote to Remain , had the figure been 250 M ?

   Not forgetting that people voted for a variety of reasons and not just because of the bus slogan .

   Was it a decisive element in peoples voting decision or irrelevant ?

Nothing to do with how many voters would have changed there minds if it was 250 or 350.  It is about should politicians state facts or fantasy ? Now Boris is just being shown up for what he is, a lying politician.  However most politicians are considered to be untruthful, or at least economical with the truth. Boris was the first to put his head over the parapit so hence the first to get shot at.

 

Will the UK become more honest if Boris is found guilty ? As much chance of that as the UK ever leaving the EU. It may however make them more circumspect in what they say rather than quoting outrageous and unsupportable figures, irrespective of what side of the political spectrum they come from. Farage should have been the target before Boris in my opinion as Boris really can't help himself whilst Farage is just an odious, self praising trouble maker, whose intent is to raise his profile in order to command bigger appearance fees on US networks when he eventually lives there. Most of the European freaks migrated to the US in the 17th/18th centuries claiming European persecution. Lets hope he is the first to re-start the trend in the 21st centuary.

[dunroaming]

It wasn't just the amount of money, it was also the implication that the money would then be spent on the NHS.  It was later admitted that that was never going to happen.  But there is a difference between what is implied and what is presented as fact.  It is hard to prosecute someone for implying something even if people are naïve enough to believe it.

 

 

[sirineou]

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

I'm looking forward to the numerous court cases against lying/misleading politicians and their supporters ????!

 

I'm trying to take this seriously as it is serious, BUT - the only court case is against Boris ??????!!

 Unfortunately it is, but it shouldn't be. If a doctor knows you have a certain condition but lies to you and tells you you have a different condition and suggest a course of action different than the one necessary, wouldn't he/she be subject to legal jeopardy? wouldn't the same be true for most professions? 

Then why not foe Boris or any other politicians? 

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, sirineou said:

 Unfortunately it is, but it shouldn't be. If a doctor knows you have a certain condition but lies to you and tells you you have a different condition and suggest a course of action different than the one necessary, wouldn't he/she be subject to legal jeopardy? wouldn't the same be true for most professions? 

Then why not foe Boris or any other politicians? 

Doctors and Politicians are two different things .

Lets stick to the topic  

[sanemax]

3 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

It wasn't just the amount of money, it was also the implication that the money would then be spent on the NHS.  It was later admitted that that was never going to happen.  But there is a difference between what is implied and what is presented as fact.  It is hard to prosecute someone for implying something even if people are naïve enough to believe it.

 

 

It was a suggestion, more than an implication .

The word used was "Could be" , it didnt say *Would be *

[dunroaming]

6 minutes ago, geoffbezoz said:

Nothing to do with how many voters would have changed there minds if it was 250 or 350.  It is about should politicians state facts or fantasy ? Now Boris is just being shown up for what he is, a lying politician.  However most politicians are considered to be untruthful, or at least economical with the truth. Boris was the first to put his head over the parapit so hence the first to get shot at.

 

Will the UK become more honest if Boris is found guilty ? As much chance of that as the UK ever leaving the EU. It may however make them more circumspect in what they say rather than quoting outrageous and unsupportable figures, irrespective of what side of the political spectrum they come from. Farage should have been the target before Boris in my opinion as Boris really can't help himself whilst Farage is just an odious, self praising trouble maker, whose intent is to raise his profile in order to command bigger appearance fees on US networks when he eventually lives there. Most of the European freaks migrated to the US in the 17th/18th centuries claiming European persecution. Lets hope he is the first to re-start the trend in the 21st centuary.

I agree that Farage should have been the first to be brought to book over the lies.  If politicians could seriously be jailed for lying then Farage would be on a life sentence by now.  As for Trump... well the key would have been thrown away years ago!

 

But politicians and lying go hand in hand.  In the past if a politician was found to be lying he would have fallen on his/her sword and resigned.  If that happened these days the Houses of Parliament would be empty.  And it all get's absorbed into a continual cycle of spin.  As Penny Mordaunt said today, "Policy has given way to presentation".  Watch out for Ms Mordaunt, she may just be biding her time before throwing her hat in the ring and if she does then she could stir things up a bit.

[dunroaming]

9 minutes ago, sanemax said:

It was a suggestion, more than an implication .

The word used was "Could be" , it didnt say *Would be *

Yes but HE said it would be when standing next to the bus.  That is why this has got as far as it has.  I still don't think it will end up with a "guilty" verdict but it will certainly make people think twice about his reliability.

[sanemax]

10 minutes ago, geoffbezoz said:

Nothing to do with how many voters would have changed there minds if it was 250 or 350.  It is about should politicians state facts or fantasy ? Now Boris is just being shown up for what he is, a lying politician.  However most politicians are considered to be untruthful, or at least economical with the truth. Boris was the first to put his head over the parapit so hence the first to get shot at.

 

Will the UK become more honest if Boris is found guilty ? As much chance of that as the UK ever leaving the EU. It may however make them more circumspect in what they say rather than quoting outrageous and unsupportable figures, irrespective of what side of the political spectrum they come from. Farage should have been the target before Boris in my opinion as Boris really can't help himself whilst Farage is just an odious, self praising trouble maker, whose intent is to raise his profile in order to command bigger appearance fees on US networks when he eventually lives there. Most of the European freaks migrated to the US in the 17th/18th centuries claiming European persecution. Lets hope he is the first to re-start the trend in the 21st centuary.

You would have preferred it if Ferange had been targeted , because he is more of a Brexiter than Boris and Ferange reason for being is to get the UK out of the E.U.

   Its debatable as to whether the 350 M a week figure is correct or not , maybe an exaggeration or misleading , but I would go as far to call it an "outrageous lie" .

  The slogan was on display and the bus was driven around long before the vote , people who disagreed with the slogan should have bought it to the publics attention before the vote.

   Have an open discussion .

Taking legal action IMO isnt the right thing to do , disusing the slogan BEFORE the vote and informing voters of any discrepancies would have been the better option 

   

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, dunroaming said:

Yes but HE said it would be when standing next to the bus.  That is why this has got as far as it has.  I still don't think it will end up with a "guilty" verdict but it will certainly make people think twice about his reliability.

Could you post a link to that or suggest the words that I need to tap into google to find out for myself ?