Labour MP charged with Perverting Course of Justice

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
Why not make them both Nigerian - but on holiday in ...Royal Tunbridge Wells?

You could have them at 11 then!
That might answer a naval fantasy just not the question.
 
M'lud, I beg to inform the court that my client was last seen in the Air Nigeria departure lounge at Heathrow Airport while dressed in a full burka and clutching her mother's passport.
Some of me really wants that to happen. Re. my comment about tokenism previously. She could then be held up for years as an example of why it's bad (although, to be fair, she's already that).
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
What, for something that was common practice in my grammar school 52 years ago and is still quite normal now?
It was a question in response to the post saying that a male under the age of consent will be given "caution for rape" if he has sex with a girl under the age of consent.
Post #2312 and a now deleted one from @The Bench visible in #2314.

The ages are now amended to twelve years, eleven months and three weeks in accordance with #2317, though the question remains unanswered.
 
It was a question in response to the post saying that a male under the age of consent will be given "caution for rape" if he has sex with a girl under the age of consent.
Post #2312 and a now deleted one from @The Bench visible in #2314.

The ages are now amended to twelve years, eleven months and three weeks in accordance with #2317, though the question remains unanswered.
My apologies, I hadn’t seen your reply to my post before I deleted it. Deleted because it was bollocks!
 
Glasgow Sheriff Court c.1979

Sheriff: Do you have anything to say before I pass sentence?
Convict: As God is my judge, I am innocent.
Sheriff: He's not. I am. You're not. Six months.
In similar vein - told better by Ned Sherrin.

BBC daily service live broadcast (opp BH) disrupted by loony/vagrant, plod brought in.

Loony: You can't arrest me, I'm Jesus Christ.
Plod: I'm sorry sir, but I'm Constable Pilate
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
My apologies, I hadn’t seen your reply to my post before I deleted it. Deleted because it was bollocks!
No wuckers.

But to amend the question in the light of #2317:

If a boy one week under the age of thirteen had sex with a similarly aged girl who initiated and continued the act, could he receive a caution for it, and if so would she also receive one for sexually assaulting him ?


And because I can read the minds of most Arrsers, the notional boy and girl are just that, notional.
And even if they were real they'd not be twins, identical or otherwise, nor would they be into bondage, dogging, gangbangs, spanking, watersports or writing to seedy middle aged men from a military themed website.
So definitely not from M*msn*t.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
In similar vein - told better by Ned Sherrin.

BBC daily service live broadcast (opp BH) disrupted by loony/vagrant, plod brought in.

Loony: You can't arrest me, I'm Jesus Christ.
Plod: I'm sorry sir, but I'm Constable Pilate
He was in the book, "Thicker Than Water. Twice As Deadly."

No duff.
 
No wuckers.

But to amend the question in the light of #2317:

If a boy one week under the age of thirteen had sex with a similarly aged girl who initiated and continued the act, could he receive a caution for it, and if so would she also receive one for sexually assaulting him ?
All I can find is that it would be refered to CPS to decide based on the individual circumstances of each case.

There is something called the Youth Offender Case Disposal Gravity Factor Matrix which determines what steps should be taken (including issuing cautions) based on the evidence for any offence committed by a young person and, in the case of Rape of Child under 13, the guidance is 'Defer Decision to CPS'.

http://www.patrolofficer.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/gravity_matrix_may09_1-1.pdf
 
Its not the Nigerian pussy that's the problem. Nor the set of railing that makes her look like she is breaking in a set of dentures for Mr. Ed the talking horse.
But it's the big fat arrse that is the problem for me. Since one happens not to be a male silver backed gorilla of course.
 
While there's been a few humorous Court exchanges on the thread. Can I throw one in.
In a Gloucestershire Crown Court during the 1930s a burglar was brought into court, he was questioned and remanded in custody. Six weeks later the burglar appeared back in front of the Judge. The Judge took one long look at him and asked the Defense; "Good God is this the same man, he has lost half his body weight?" "It's prison food M'lud," replied the defense lawyer. There remained a few moments silence as the judge gazed at the Burglar over his glasses. during the silence the burglar spoke up "You could do wif a few months yerself M'lud!"
 
Couldn't find the whole joke, but a feller is caught having a knee- trembler in a doorway on Friday night, in Bradford.

Up in front of the beak, the judge sentences him to 3 months......... "Do you have anything to say ?"




"Tha'll niver stop fooking in Bradford !"
 
From Ognall:
I do rejoice in a no doubt apocryphal tale that was circulating in the Law Courts in the Strand when I was there. A judge had reached the end of a long civil action. He told counsel that he would deliver judgement after the coming weekend. He worked on it at home, and returned to the court on Monday. Unfortunately, he had left his written judgement at home. When he told counsel of this, the following reply, no doubt helpfully intended, came from one of them:
‘Fax it up, my Lord?’
‘Yes,’ replied the judge, ‘I fear it does, rather.’
 
A circuit judge mostly always gave a particular aging barrister a hard time of it in court. During a divorce case the Barrister asked a question of the defense lawyer. The Judge shouted loudly at him 'I disallow that question, don't waste time, and don't ever ask it ever again in my court!" They adjourned for lunch. At lunch the young solicitors were pulling the Barristers leg about him and his having a hard time from the Judge. "Never mind" replied the Barrister, come to court at 2pm if you want a bit of a giggle" At 2pm in they all trouped.

The Barrister asked the same question again. The judge was absolutely furious!
A silence followed and the Barrister said. " M'lud it was asked in the case of Casey V Curruthures in 1898 and was allowed. It was asked again in 1932 in the case of Hollis V Llewellyn, the presiding judge was your very own father M'lud and it was allowed" The judge was thoughtful for a long moment and said quietly. "Alright, Alright go ahead and ask it" "No I won't ask it now" said the Barrister, "I can see that it really upsets you!"
 
He's not suggesting that, read the rest of the comments and come down off your soapbox.

On the other hand, at least you're predictable in your obtuseness.
Hes been paying me lots of attention lately, just thought I"d return the compliment.
Im sure he'll appreciate your support, though.
 
Hes been paying me lots of attention lately, just thought I"d return the compliment.
Im sure he'll appreciate your support, though.
So, in one thread, between Wednesday and yesterday, I gave you four "dumb"s, which I believe were deserved. You, showing how not bothered and untriggered you are, in return gave me three in under a minute on three different threads.
But you trawl through posts from four days earlier...
#conflicted.
Hypocrisy, thy name is BB.
 
I'm just wondering if Bravo Bravo is our regional manager. Never stops banging on about the TA, never been further than Portsmouth and got a kicking from the office junior at the Xmas party. I last saw him wandering off Guildford way muttering something about office civvy cnuts and wanting to bayonet a paperboy.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top