Discussion in 'Military Discipline' started by A day late, Apr 3, 2011.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Howdya wind up a load of pommy *******?
I don't think the JAG will be reading ARRSE so I wouldn't worry too much Darren.
In my day, pistols at dawn would have been the way to go. Next time you're wearing full dress, just throw down your gauntlet and demand satisfaction. (Unless you're dealing with one of these sodomites that I hear they've stopped hanging, in which case he may try to get the rest of your kit off and offer you a quickie).
"Damn your eyes, sir... you're behaving like a blackguard of the highest order" and then throw your drink in his face. I believe that's how you deal with it, of course I may be behind the times.
If that discussion had included the defendant and his current girlfriend, and consisted of stuff that was already in the public domain, I think the defendant would not only not have much chance of demonstrating that this was prejudicial to his case, but may also find himself up on an additional charge of contempt of court.
Fair point there. If your other half can't keep from discussing every single detail of what's going on, then why should anyone else? You can't hide behind the Contempt of Court Act unless you want the other half to get banged up for it too.
When have I ever said that? You clearly need to do some more research.
If you want my name and telephone number, it's on the bog walls in the Lord Moon on the Mall.
Anything that appears on this site is considered to be in the public domain. From what I've read, the comments by your other half may have dug you into a deeper hole than anything anyone else has said.
We don't actually care.
How come I am aware of the rebuttal, and the existence of the other article, despite not having done any snooping myself? I do not need to review posts to know what was said, nor by whom. As for the plausibility of charges of contempt of court, I don't think you are in a particularly good position to assess that.
My reasoning for asserting that "I am aware of the rebuttal, and the existence of the other article, despite not having done any snooping myself" is that I knew that there was a third article, and I knew what that article said merely by reading the threads to which you refer.
My reasoning for asserting "I don't think you are in a particularly good position to assess (the plausibility of charges of contempt of court)" is that the appearance you give is of someone who is not fully conversant with the legal process, moreover, in my opinion, the only people who are qualified to make that assessment are members of the legal profession, and as none of those with any sense would open themselves up to the potential career-stopping implications of becoming involved in an imbroglio such as this, can safely conclude that you are talking out of your hoop.
Having had a little experience of DCM (I was in front of Bulford DCM a while ago for a very trivial matter which "should have never got that far and extra's would have sufficed" words of the court not mine), and just finished my LLB I like to think I know a little but prob not.
The court will only present the facts of the case in hand, yes character may be brought up in court but it is unlikely that character since the incident will be used as you clearly would be affected by having the prospect of a DCM hanging over your head.
Further to this it is hardly professional practice for the members of the court to base any decision on what they read in ARRSE or overhear. All judgements are based on the evidence presented to the court nothing else.
According to that he's a dirty kiddie fiddler and coward, can you prove otherwise as you don't know him?
Oh further to this, you will not really get the chance to speak in a CM your legal rep will do all your talking (so get a good one, mine had just finished in the High Court the week before on a murder case and was epic). If you are to give evidence (which is doubtful) you can not add any statements that are not in the original questions put too you.
I would not get over worried, these guys are fair and take all facts into consideration before passing judgement.
Whats a perfect example? If he is a dirty kiddie fiddler and coward, whats the problem? The post would only be stating the truth.
Good guess about me being the pride of the regiment though.
Separate names with a comma.