You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
We've all a ringside seat on this one. Gove now being dragged in. Many more journalists digging dirt on pair of them, and I bet there's a few lawyer and police meetings happening over all sorts. The more Mone and Barrowman feel heat, the more they are lashing out.
I'll put the kettle on. Anyone got some biccies?
I noticed on the news they were trying to get an answer from gove when he was getting into a range Rover. His face soured quite quickly as he turned away
My question is how could you tell that Gove’s face soured ? Normal expression surely ? 😉
Mone was always going to be the one thrown under a bus - staggers me that the Tories couldn’t see that she’d turn. Rats in a bag the lot of them. Good riddance.
Michelle Mone Class Warrior, who saw that coming? She's been operating deep undercover, bent on taking them all down.
mrlebowski
Free Member
Mone was always going to be the one thrown under a bus – staggers me that the Tories couldn’t see that she’d turn.
Tories looking beyond the end of their own noses is a skill yet to be aquired
Mone was always going to be the one thrown under a bus
They managed to do it to themselves pretty comprehensively on Kunnesberg's show. I mean did they really think by saying that they were only responding patriotically to requests for help with PPE, but simultaneously going to great lengths to hide the company doing it through any number of off-shore shell companies and putting the whole thing in another person's name, and then lying about it; that anyone would just nod along and say "Who wouldn't do that?"
Idiots.
Michelle Mone Class Warrior, who saw that coming?
If you've been following her activity as a critical race theorist and anti-racist, it's no surprise at all:
“Since when did calling out a man on his actions after a manslaughter and his entitled white privilege constitute racism?”
that would make you wonder if you really should be doing the thing?
Well quite. Like naming a boat "The Lady M" and then claiming that you've nothing to do with it as "It's my husbands boat" I mean, criminal masterminds, they ain't.
What's that saying about the dildo of consequence?
Let's hope this succeeds, as reading many twottter comments it's a first action to prove the law/case and it will be followed by every newspaper who she and Barrowman have (falsely) used lawyers to stop them printing truth.
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/why-were-suing-michelle-mone/
MoreCashThanDash
Full Member
If you feel the need to hide something for fear of press intrusion upsetting your kids, surely that would make you wonder if you really should be doing the thing?
Ha! Well said. 👍
Get in:
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/newspaper-sue-michelle-mone-legal-161149336.html
Hope this is the first of many to sue the bullying couple. They abused their wealth to try and silence people and now need to pay for their actions.
Any thoughts on why they sold the Belgravia gaff and Lady-M is on the market? Is it to squirrel away liquid assets to the IoM, to claim 'all the money's gone', PR advice about flaunting ill-gotten-gains or in preparation for 'it's a fair cop, you can have the money money back if we don't do bird'?
Get in:<br />
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/newspaper-sue-michelle-mone-legal-161149336.html
/p>Hope this is the first of many to sue the bullying couple. They abused their wealth to try and silence people and now need to pay for their actions.
Was watching The Rest is Politics on youtube and they were mentioning this stuff, Alastair Campbell is part of the New European and giving some more depth to this whole scandal.
BillMCFull Member<br />Any thoughts on why they sold the Belgravia gaff and Lady-M is on the market? Is it to squirrel away liquid assets to the IoM, to claim ‘all the money’s gone’, PR advice about flaunting ill-gotten-gains or in preparation for ‘it’s a fair cop, you can have the money money back if we don’t do bird’?<br /><br />
Im voting for it all been squirrelled away so they can then claim they don’t have to pay anything as they are broke and hard up.
The Tories must be loving the attention she is getting so the others who profited in the same way can get away without scrutiny. It’s not as if she was the only one upto this in cahoots with the government
I have mixed feelings about the newspaper suing them. Not because I have any sympathy for the lying bar stewards, but because of the legal precedent that could be set and the law of unintended consequence that could be created.
We currently have a system where the super wealthy are often chummy with much of the media, and able to bully the more independent media through the legal system. However much of that media is also able to bully and exploit the general public who don't have access to the legal power of the super wealthy, and I can't help but think that a legal precedent in this case would further strengthen that position.
IMO this needs fixing by legislation, and not just for those who can afford to flex their legal purchasing power.
I have mixed feelings about the newspaper suing them. Not because I have any sympathy for the lying bar stewards, but because of the legal precedent that could be set and the law of unintended consequence that could be created.
My gut feel is you are worrying needlessly - I expect the court will say, if you were 100% sure about the content you posted you didn't need to incur any costs, you simply file the threat in the bin. Had Mone wanted a court to impose an injunction to stop them posting, the burden of proof would have been on Mone, and had she failed she could/would have been liable for the papers costs.
1) what legal precedent do you think it would set?
2) it's a weird conclusion that a newspaper with barely any readers is bullying a dishonest multimillionaire because they want recover the money they spent defending themselves against the dishonest millionaire's dishonesty. If she hadn't dishonestly sicced a bunch of expensive lawyers against the newspaper in an attempt to obfuscate her dishonesty, there would be nothing to sue over. She is not being sued for being unsuccessful in a genuine attempt to protect her legitimate rights.
You have it backwards: only if the rich are punished for their SLAPPs and lies will the media ever have a chance to expose the truth.
It's worth reading the New European's own article on this:
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/why-were-suing-michelle-mone/
Not because I have any sympathy for the lying bar stewards, but because of the legal precedent that could be set and the law of unintended consequence that could be created.
Reading a ****ter thread on this, which clearly has some legal folk on it, the suggestion is that it will be quite a high bar to overcome to win. The newspaper has to demonstrate that Mone and Barrowman deliberately and knowingly acted to create false knowledge and that Mone and Barrowman stood to gain from this course of action.
1) what legal precedent do you think it would set?
The protential precedent is that anytime someone sends a letter to a paper telling them to stop talking shite, that the paper replies saying "we are not talking shite, and will sue you for costs" even if they were indeed talking shite because the media are not known for being the best behaved.
2) it’s a weird conclusion that a newspaper with barely any readers is bullying a dishonest multimillionaire because they want recover the money they spent defending themselves against the dishonest millionaire’s dishonesty. If she hadn’t dishonestly sicced a bunch of expensive lawyers against the newspaper in an attempt to obfuscate her dishonesty, there would be nothing to sue over. She is not being sued for being unsuccessful in a genuine attempt to protect her legitimate rights.
I don't think MSP was suggesting that the power imbalance here was with the paper, rather he was concerned that in some future case Joe Bloggs gets misreported, calls his solictiors and says can you tell them to publish a retraction and either the solicitor or the paper's solicitor says we will counter sue for costs just for you making the threat.
You have it backwards: only if the rich are punished for their SLAPPs and lies will the media ever have a chance to expose the truth.
It’s worth reading the New European’s own article on this:
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/why-were-suing-michelle-mone/
/p>
They might be better putting their effort towards the SRA - there's no way that even the most basic scrutiny that a responsible solicitor could not know they were involved with MedPro, and she's on the bloody boat with her name on it, owned by her hubby!
The protential precedent is that anytime someone sends a letter to a paper telling them to stop talking shite, that the paper replies saying “we are not talking shite, and will sue you for costs” even if they were indeed talking shite because the media are not known for being the best behaved.
...and that is not what The New European wining would mean! This is a parade of horribles based on nothing.
Reading a ****ter thread on this, which clearly has some legal folk on it, the suggestion is that it will be quite a high bar to overcome to win. The newspaper has to demonstrate that Mone and Barrowman deliberately and knowingly acted to create false knowledge and that Mone and Barrowman stood to gain from this course of action.
Pretty sure the reason the New European were raising this was down to the interview providing evidence of this, in their own words, out of their own mouths.
A recent 'News Agents' podcast had a lawyer in talking about his idea for reforming the law to make the 'threat' of suing without evidence or falsely far harder and with criminal repercussions and the ability for those threatened to sue for legal costs.
Seemed quite reasonable.
She is still winding this one up, still calling out others...
https://twitter.com/MichelleMone/status/1738232331255656669?t=tskCG0Mpe3eZoD0sIKgbew&s=19
"The government" - as if that is a group of people entirely remote from Mone herself.
Besides, selling gowns cheaper than the average price isn't a great bargain if they're so shitty they can't be used!
Agreed.
I'm more laughing at her drunk adolescent ranting and returning to the scene of the argument. I'm hoping she keeps it up for entertainment purposes.
I am hoping she does come up with some decent attacks on some of her fellow profiteers.
Nothing better than arseholes having a proper scrap with each other.
She really is deluded.
C’mon be fair to mone, the entire ****ing Tory party along with their client journalists are ****ing deluded.
You do get the sense that it is to the benefit of certain, more conventional Tory donors that the focus of our anger is directed entirely at some rather vulgar Scottish bra-lady.
So while she's obviously a scumbag, hopefully she will take a few of the others down with her.
Who is advising them on PR? They are genuinely still arguing this one and constantly pulling it back to the public eye.
https://twitter.com/guardiannews/status/1741790761417597323?t=klB75YZ1Wl1whi_JP-xj0A&s=19
https://twitter.com/DanNeidle/status/1741767320832266667?t=cAMcMRVvTHbckkucLa3Bqw&s=19
@matt_outandabout I suspect it doesn't matter who's advising them, as they'll know better.
A fair point.
Let's hope they keep hanging themselves and the politicians who enabled this behaviour...
😃
Assets controlled by former Tory peer Michelle Mone and her husband Doug Barrowman have been frozen under a court order obtained by the Crown Prosecution Service.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68087776.amp
I think the best we can hope for is that they won't make as much profit from the PPE scandal and other fraudulent activity as they hoped to.
It's hardly justice but the rich dont live by the same rules as the rest of us.
It's nice to see the dildo of doom homing in on them though, if very slowly.
snipers briefcase
Which Edition of Roger's Profanisaurus was that in?
Her lawyer is suing her for wrecking his reputation by sending him out with false info so he inadvertently lied to folk and also for saying that he4 advised her to lie to the media<br /><br /> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/26/michelle-mone-former-lawyer-says-he-wants-apology-damage-to-reputation
Which Edition of Roger’s Profanisaurus was that in?
No idea, I first heard the phrase from a colleague of mine when she referred to her 'drawer of tricks' that would come into play when entertaining her lady callers.
She was an incredibly funny lass, an endless source of morale.
This was a few days ago, her business wasn't as successful as most people think.
Michelle Mone: leading entrepreneur or lucky baroness? | Michelle Mone | The Guardian
dazzled by her décolletage, embonpoint and snipers briefcase
Pure filth.
An arrest made.
Sadly not Mone or Barrowman.
We can but hope.
https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/jun/12/man-arrested-investigation-ppe-medpro
Hopefully they flip him, he starts talking and they bring them both down.
🤞
I think if they throw her under the bus then she is coming out swinging and taking anyone she can with her.
John Barrowman ??
Hopefully they flip him, he starts talking and they bring them both down.
The yacht will be slipping its mooring a few days before, if it ever happens.
The yacht will be slipping its mooring a few days before, if it ever happens
More likely someone slipping off the yacht Maxwell style
It appears that the MedPro must pay £122 million back to the government 👍
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cy08xg226l1t
Will it ever get paid back?
Will her, her husband and their immediate beneficiaries live in poverty if it’s not?
She is without question the sacrificial lamb - but they need to look at this guy too....David Meller.
How on earth has £8M been spent on storage
Was it in Gove's shed?
I very much doubt a penny will be paid. The company will mysteriously go into liquidation and pop up with another name and those involved not a penny worse off
I very much doubt a penny will be paid. The company will mysteriously go into liquidation and pop up with another name and those involved not a penny worse off
Nice yacht/house…..shame if anything happens to it
The company will mysteriously go into liquidation and pop up with another name and those involved not a penny worse off
Yup. They have extracted all the cash out of it so its served its purpose and can just be liquidated/abandoned. Although in this case no need for a new name since unlike the average dodgy shop avoiding tax/customer warranties etc and so needing to reopen under a new name this was a once and done deal.
Medpro already in the process of appointing administrators according to BBC website, so another scalping of cash before peanuts get paid back to UK government.
I very much doubt a penny will be paid. The company will mysteriously go into liquidation and pop up with another name and those involved not a penny worse off
Nice yacht/house…..shame if anything happens to it
I'd ask the mods to remove your comment - as it could be construed as inciting vigalente behaviour which is likely illegal.
I very much doubt a penny will be paid. The company will mysteriously go into liquidation and pop up with another name and those involved not a penny worse off
Nice yacht/house…..shame if anything happens to it
I'd ask the mods to remove your comment - as it could be construed as inciting vigalente behaviour which is likely illegal.
nah, I’m fine with it, you report if you deem it so
They are a day ahead, adminstrator appointed yesterday it seems
I'm loving the way that BARONESS Mone is complaining about an establishment win, and a monumental Government PPE overspend! Presumably, no mirrors in their home! Both she and her Husband have been vocally critical of the Judge, and how the Judgement was reached. If their assertions are true, then it would seem that the Court of Appeal would be better than "X" for arguing those points - presumably, however, that is now a decision for the Administrator.
I have a recollection that a liquidator (who would need to be appointed with DHSC agreement) can attempt to recover assets that were disposed of from a company that was inevitably going to become insolvent? Although that could create an interesting situation, as I think the Mones' assets are frozen under proceeds of crime rules, whilst criminal matters are concluded!
Of course the treasury is unlikely to see much if any, of that money come back into its books. But we are all guilty of seeing these huge numbers blur into the story, without thinking about the real value. £122m is about 6 months revenue costs for my local health board. £122m isn't just a big number that the Mones will hide/avoid/dodge. It is a sum significant enough to make a material difference in the NHS.
Medpro already in the process of appointing administrators according to BBC website, so another scalping of cash before peanuts get paid back to UK government.
Sadly expected - rich enough to know the loopholes.
If it was a`normal` non multimillionaire person getting caught committing fraud for £122,000 they`d already be in prison awaiting sentencing.
I wonder if they can get the £65 million squirrelled away in the family trust fund?
I very much doubt a penny will be paid. The company will mysteriously go into liquidation and pop up with another name and those involved not a penny worse off
Nice yacht/house…..shame if anything happens to it
I'd ask the mods to remove your comment - as it could be construed as inciting vigalente behaviour which is likely illegal.
I reckon that comment would fall well short of the threshold for "grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character." In the context of the s.127 of the Comms Act 2003 or language that "provoke(s) the immediate use of unlawful violence." As prohibited by s. 4 of the Public Order Act 1986.
IANAL however. 😉
@aberdeenlune This from last year https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/26/michelle-mone-assets-frozen-nca-investigates-fraud would suggest that things are not going to improve for "Lady" Mone in the mid-term.
I understand the life peerage will disappear on summary conviction, to explain the quotation marks.