tommy sherridan

Moderators: John, Sharon, Fossil, Lucky Poet, crusty_bint, Jazza, dazza

Re: 4.5 million

Postby bcuk10 » Fri Dec 17, 2010 4:09 pm

north glasgow dave wrote:4.5 of tax payers money..thats an absolute discrace.

If the notw loose do they pay the costs £4.5 million ?
User avatar
bcuk10
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 12:06 am
Location: NORTH GLASGOW

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby Dexter St. Clair » Fri Dec 17, 2010 4:26 pm

The NOTW lost when Tommy sued them. They have an appeal in. If Tommy Loses the criminal perjury trial the NOTW will go ahead with the appeal. If Tommy is not guilty it 's then up to the NOTW to continue or drop their appeal.

The taxpayer pays the £4.5m for the criminal perjury trial regardless of the outcome.
"I before E, except after C" works in most cases but there are exceptions.
User avatar
Dexter St. Clair
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 6252
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby hungryjoe » Fri Dec 17, 2010 8:20 pm

I heard on the radio that the charges against Gail have been dropped. I don't know what the arguments are, about who's supposed to have said what, but I have to assume that Tommy and Gail were singing from the same hymn sheet, so I imagine it's looking good for Tommy.
Multi dinero, multi ficky fick, multi divorce.
User avatar
hungryjoe
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 1746
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:26 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby aland » Fri Dec 17, 2010 9:19 pm

lets hope so Joe
aland
Second Stripe
Second Stripe
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby strange brew » Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:09 pm

hungryjoe wrote:I heard on the radio that the charges against Gail have been dropped. I don't know what the arguments are, about who's supposed to have said what, but I have to assume that Tommy and Gail were singing from the same hymn sheet, so I imagine it's looking good for Tommy.


Not really. The prosecution basically ignored Gail and didn't bother putting forward any evidence against her, instead choosing to focus on Tommy. If anything, this is bad for him.
User avatar
strange brew
Busy bunny
Busy bunny
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 2:20 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby Dexter St. Clair » Sat Dec 18, 2010 9:17 am

strange brew wrote:
hungryjoe wrote:I heard on the radio that the charges against Gail have been dropped. I don't know what the arguments are, about who's supposed to have said what, but I have to assume that Tommy and Gail were singing from the same hymn sheet, so I imagine it's looking good for Tommy.


Not really. The prosecution basically ignored Gail and didn't bother putting forward any evidence against her, instead choosing to focus on Tommy. If anything, this is bad for him.



The prosecution might have charged Gail in the first place to put pressure on Tommy to plead guilty as long as his wife was released. It's an old trick.

If the prosecution is relying on stand up citizens like Andy Coulson and George McNeilage and a haridan of former MSPs do you seriously think they're winning?
"I before E, except after C" works in most cases but there are exceptions.
User avatar
Dexter St. Clair
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 6252
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby Glesga_Steve » Sat Dec 18, 2010 4:14 pm

strange brew wrote:
Mori wrote:Unbelievable...what do we get out it ?

Hootsman

Sheridan Trial: Perjury case has cost the taxpayer £4.5m, says Sheridan's press officer


What are you supposed to get out of it? Is it a legal requirement that every trial should benefit the taxpaying public?

Drop the 'legal' bit and I'd say the answer to your question is yes.

A trial shouldn't be pusued if it isn't in the public (taxpaying or otherwise) interest. That isn't a comment on the Sheridan trial btw.
User avatar
Glesga_Steve
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 674
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 12:46 am

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby fourbytwo » Sat Dec 18, 2010 4:28 pm

8) Too easy to get embroiled in the 'wheeling and dealing' that has went on before and during this trial...
The one issue that to my mind has NEVER been explained to anyone's satisfaction, is this.....
Police investigations that were carried out with such 'Vim and Vinegar' even before charges were muted.
Who was asking for these, and more to the point, paying for it so in advance of legal proceedings....?
This issue alone opens up a vast can of worms, could it be that the NOTW applied pressure, and if so, should they have the power to use the Public Purse to their advantage...?
The same applies, if Sheridan is found innocent, will the Public Purse be claiming back some of the vast bill and costs from the NOTW, or will we just swallow it as usual..............?
User avatar
fourbytwo
Second Stripe
Second Stripe
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 11:08 am
Location: Priesthill, Glasgow

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby RDR » Sat Dec 18, 2010 9:10 pm

fourbytwo wrote:8) Too easy to get embroiled in the 'wheeling and dealing' that has went on before and during this trial...
The one issue that to my mind has NEVER been explained to anyone's satisfaction, is this.....
Police investigations that were carried out with such 'Vim and Vinegar' even before charges were muted.
Who was asking for these, and more to the point, paying for it so in advance of legal proceedings....?
This issue alone opens up a vast can of worms, could it be that the NOTW applied pressure, and if so, should they have the power to use the Public Purse to their advantage...?
The same applies, if Sheridan is found innocent, will the Public Purse be claiming back some of the vast bill and costs from the NOTW, or will we just swallow it as usual..............?


That's an unfortunate comment in the context of this case 8O
He advocated for the weak against the strong, the poor against the rich and labour against capital.
RDR
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 1641
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 9:58 pm
Location: Lanarkshire

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby Johnny_Gogo » Sat Dec 18, 2010 11:36 pm

RDR wrote:
fourbytwo wrote:8) Too easy to get embroiled in the 'wheeling and dealing' that has went on before and during this trial...
The one issue that to my mind has NEVER been explained to anyone's satisfaction, is this.....
Police investigations that were carried out with such 'Vim and Vinegar' even before charges were muted.
Who was asking for these, and more to the point, paying for it so in advance of legal proceedings....?
This issue alone opens up a vast can of worms, could it be that the NOTW applied pressure, and if so, should they have the power to use the Public Purse to their advantage...?
The same applies, if Sheridan is found innocent, will the Public Purse be claiming back some of the vast bill and costs from the NOTW, or will we just swallow it as usual..............?


That's an unfortunate comment in the context of this case 8O


Is it?
Its a political trial and pure theatre. Gail wi' the fur coats and kissin rosary beads, FFS diz she think god & Liam O'Donnell [the drug dealers lawyers of choice] got her off wi it? Naw hen, you were always a diversion on the flank. Yur man is the target.
User avatar
Johnny_Gogo
First Stripe
First Stripe
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:51 pm

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby strange brew » Sun Dec 19, 2010 4:43 am

Glesga_Steve wrote:
strange brew wrote:
Mori wrote:Unbelievable...what do we get out it ?

Hootsman

Sheridan Trial: Perjury case has cost the taxpayer £4.5m, says Sheridan's press officer


What are you supposed to get out of it? Is it a legal requirement that every trial should benefit the taxpaying public?

Drop the 'legal' bit and I'd say the answer to your question is yes.

A trial shouldn't be pusued if it isn't in the public (taxpaying or otherwise) interest. That isn't a comment on the Sheridan trial btw.


Ok then, is it in the public interest to pursue a case where two sides have given totally contradictory evidence and therefore the conclusion must be drawn that one side has lied in court and perjury has been committed?

Of course I'm obviously not referring to the Sheridan trial in any way here, lest I be in contempt of court.
User avatar
strange brew
Busy bunny
Busy bunny
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 2:20 pm
Location: Glasgow

wrongful arrest

Postby north glasgow dave » Sun Dec 19, 2010 7:26 am

so will gail sheridan now sue the crown for wrongful arrest. which will mean any compensation she receives will be a further expense to the tax payers.
north glasgow dave
Second Stripe
Second Stripe
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 4:24 pm

Re: wrongful arrest

Postby Dexter St. Clair » Sun Dec 19, 2010 8:49 am

north glasgow dave wrote:so will gail sheridan now sue the crown for wrongful arrest. which will mean any compensation she receives will be a further expense to the tax payers.



no.
"I before E, except after C" works in most cases but there are exceptions.
User avatar
Dexter St. Clair
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 6252
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby moonbeam » Mon Dec 20, 2010 12:33 pm

Some one is telling porkie pies. Will Tommy get off? Its up to the jury.
When will the book and movie of the case come out. Will
we ever know the "real" truth? What now for the SSP and
Tommys party? Can anyone trust a very left of centre political
movement/party in the West of Scotland who seem intent in
tearing themselves apart. I suspect very few will bother to
vote for them in the May election. Basically if they are not telling
the truth in court how can anyone belive them in an election.
moonbeam
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 449
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:32 am

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby fourbytwo » Mon Dec 20, 2010 2:49 pm

8O To be perfectly honest....there are so many lies being told before, during and after this trial that the only way to get a result might be to form 'tug-of-war teams', with Tommy and his liars on one rope, and the NOTW liars on the other end. and as each team is evenly matched......."take the strain..." ::):
User avatar
fourbytwo
Second Stripe
Second Stripe
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 11:08 am
Location: Priesthill, Glasgow

PreviousNext

Return to Random Distractions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests