No 10 begins the fight against honours for cash prosecution

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Cuddles, Nov 15, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. No, never, not no way, un-huh, great blistering balls of fire NO!

    0 vote(s)
  2. Yeah, why not. Rome's burning anyway...

    0 vote(s)
  1. I see that the lawyers are about to take wing, like dracula and his unholy brood of vampires.

    Apparently "leaks" have made it impossible for the denizens of Number Ten to have a fair trial and they will attempt to avoid a prosecution on that ground. Please tell me that not one penny of public funds is to spent on the occupants of the prime ministerial office defending any charges that may or may not arise?

    How on earth can it possibly be justified for individuals accused of criminal charges, regardless of their day jobs as "public servants", to receive free legal counsel? If this were about some element of their day jobs, for example starting an allegedly illegal war - then fair enough. If in their free time they choose to operate an illegal conspiracy allegedly, then they must step up like any other member of the public and pay their own legal fees - or apply for legal aid. Means tested as always.

    as for "leaks", surely those who live by the "off the record briefing, surely so shall they be briefed against"?
  2. Surely, this is a party political issue as opposed to a governmental one? That's the way I view it; in which case any legal defence should be conducted using Labour party funds. Can anyone else lend Labour a few bob (there may be a handy little job at the end of it...)
  3. Couldn't we offset the costs against future earnings on the lecture circuit?

    You know, a bit like organisations often don't declare loans in the relevant financial year?