 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
What a complete misappropriation of finite resources and failure to respect the priorities of a nation.
Prosecuting Huhne and Pryce? You think they should just let people get away with deliberately attempting to subvert the law then?
...and I can't help but think he may well have already suffered enough through having the misfortune of acqiring an (ex)partner who's evidently so vicious and vindictive.
You do know he was shagging someone else behind her back don't you? Also he already had 9 points on his license which suggests 3 previous convictions. You'd kinda think that someone so "brilliant" and "talented" would be a little quicker on the uptake.
He's an arrogant cock.
Yeah if a witness says "yep he did it, I saw him" I wondered why after a not guilty verdict the witness didn't get clobbered for perjury but then again some witnesses make honest mistakes, also some accused are found not-guilty due to other reasons, technicalities etc. Witness tells the truth but CPS screw up, those scenarios could end badly. You don't want to put honest people off being a witness do you?always wondered why certain police/witnesses have'nt being prosecuted for perverting the course of justice
(alleged) Police "stitch ups" are a bit different of course.
I really do despise Huhne. Whilst most peoples view is that the speeding fine wasn't significant, I think Coyote sums it up pretty well in his post above. All the drivers I know who have 9 points have got them because they repeatedly drive like ****ers. It's not they they are unlucky, it's that time and time they drive dangerously with no consideration to others.
If you get to 9 points and you carry on driving like a bellend, that shows a clear arrogance that you think it's OK for you to to drive like that. Doesn't do his environmental credentials much good either.
How about paying attention and figuring out what he was found guilty of ?
C'mon, you've been on here long enough to know better than asking questions like that!
always wondered why certain police/witnesses have'nt being prosecuted for perverting the course of justice,two cases spring to mind ... and stefan kiszko
It appears they were http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed#Police_cleared_of_any_wrongdoing
scrap it, out of my depth again
Just thought I'd resurrect this as there's an interesting take on it by [url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/12/huhne-pryce-jailing-inability-punish-public-failings ]Simon Jenkins[/url] today
TLDR
he kinda lost me after that para TBH, he may have a point about the baying for blood; mind you most news stories nowadays are either a media circus frenzy or a witch hunt or both, not unique to this one.Going over the speed limit is rightly an offence, but it is not reckless or dangerous driving. An estimated 10 million drivers, based on a survey conducted by Churchill insurers, say they would consider switching points to avoid a partner losing a licence. Reports from the AA and others suggest over half a million such "crimes" already. A law with so little public consent is a bad law and needs changing.
I'd gloss over that bit Donk. Its not really the start of the article, but the points he makes about the reasons for prosecution, and public vilification that are interesting.
[i]The truth is that we have so few ways of making power answer for its misdeeds that we grab hold of any stick that will do. There is virtually no accountability for incompetence in office beyond the ballot.[/i]
a half milion offences means that a law with so little public consent is a bad law and should be abolished ????? i suppose Simon Jenkins thinks burglary should not be a crime either.
No proportionate justice would commit Chris Huhne and Vicky Pryce to jail. They did what thousands do, switched points and lied. No one died. No one was hurt. No one lost money. All they did was get caught through their own foolishness. They will not repeat their crime and pose no threat to society that requires incarceration.
He does have a point there....
Agree with just about all of that.
I can't see how prison sentences are going to benefit anyone under these circumstances. Community service would have been more than enough.
The truth is that we have so few ways of making power answer for its misdeeds that we grab hold of any stick that will do. There is virtually no accountability for incompetence in office beyond the ballot.
This however, is interesting. And there seems to be a lot of it going on at the moment. In an information age where everything is documented I reckon we'll see a lot more of it too.
They did what thousands do, switched points and lied. No one died. No one was hurt. No one lost money.
This is a redundant argument - it does not justify the actions. Because others break the law then it's ok?
The truth is that we have so few ways of making power answer for its misdeeds that we grab hold of any stick that will do. There is virtually no accountability for incompetence in office beyond the ballot.
This. The seeming impunity of those in power, who have been shown to abuse their position, seems to have angered a lot of people. These two have presented an opportunity to make frustrations known.The scale of the offence is less unpalatable than the apparent contempt shown for the rule of law that governs the rest of us.
This is a redundant argument
I'd say "They did what thousands do, switched points and lied." is irrelevant, however "No one died. No one was hurt. No one lost money. " is a valid point. If a law criminalises people who do no harm to anyone other than themselves, it's probably a daft law.
@footflaps - I see your point, but the Police time, CPS, courts time etc - it's not quite as simple as made out in the Gurniad, they were diverting resources. Who is to say what effect that may have had.
In my mind, the points are, in sequence:"No one died. No one was hurt. No one lost money. "
1) (if the current govt/police position on speeding/points etc is correct) A potentially dangerous driver avoided a ban by transfering blame falsely to his wife. Common enough, but so's theft
2) The above act is easily interpretable as perverting th course of justice. Common enough, but rarely discovered
3) The towering arrogance & stupidity of Pryce and then Huhne in attempting respectively to manipulate or obstruct the legal system to their own ends is sufficient to require them to be isolated from society in case it's contagious
4) The actual monetary "cost" of the 2 cases will prob never be clear but it'll be plenty
The prosecution also acts as a deterrent to future justice perverts.