Magister Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Interesting story but as a tax specialist myself (VAT), it's a bit like adding 1 + 1 together and getting 4,000,000. My guess is that UKIP don't actually have a clue what is going on and so couldn't say either way. Jim Mc may be a Director of OPP Ltd which is a UK based company, as far as I can see. The Luxembourg company which has an 81% share in OPP, may not have anything to do with the Council and Jim Mc other than the investment in OPP itself. Unless Jim is also a member of the board for the Luxembourg company, I don't think Bickley has much of a point. Jim could just be representing the Councils interests, as I assume they are a minority shareholder. I don't know ultimately but I don't think Bickley knows either. u I am certain there is nothing untoward here or even newsworthy but I am amused by " my Guess " "May be" " as far as I can see " " May not have anything to do " " jim could just be" " I assume " " I don't Know" " I don't think" He does not need one but if Mr McMahon did I hope you won't be offended if I recommended he sought a different defence counsel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 u I am certain there is nothing untoward here or even newsworthy but I am amused by " my Guess " "May be" " as far as I can see " " May not have anything to do " " jim could just be" " I assume " " I don't Know" " I don't think" He does not need one but if Mr McMahon did I hope you won't be offended if I recommended he sought a different defence counsel And if you're prosecuting after someone gets rumbled standing over a body with a smoking bazooka...I reckon they're getting off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 (edited) u I am certain there is nothing untoward here or even newsworthy but I am amused by " my Guess " "May be" " as far as I can see " " May not have anything to do " " jim could just be" " I assume " " I don't Know" " I don't think" He does not need one but if Mr McMahon did I hope you won't be offended if I recommended he sought a different defence counsel Good man if your more certain than I am (my guess is the same - ha). Though I assure you the use of such wording was wholly intended because I do not know the details though it's easy to spread doubt in what UKIP have tried to imply by offering other possible scenarios. As 24 has pointed out, there is a difference between assuming and proving certainty. Edited December 11, 2015 by jimsleftfoot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magister Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 And if you're prosecuting after someone gets rumbled standing over a body with a smoking bazooka...I reckon they're getting off. Oh don' t underestimate the Jury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Oh don' t underestimate the Jury. Yes...the most frightening 12 people on the planet for any defendant. Totally unrelated to Jim McMahon but... A friend of Mrs 24 did jury service recently. Two of the jurors started an affair. Two others became golf partners. When the court rose so they could consider their verdict on a Friday morning, there was a strong caucus in favour of a quick decision - any decision. Whatever you do out there, folks, try not to involve a jury of your peers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Yes...the most frightening 12 people on the planet for any defendant. Totally unrelated to Jim McMahon but... A friend of Mrs 24 did jury service recently. Two of the jurors started an affair. Two others became golf partners. When the court rose so they could consider their verdict on a Friday morning, there was a strong caucus in favour of a quick decision - any decision. Whatever you do out there, folks, try not to involve a jury of your peers. The jury seemed far more capable than the prosecution and defence lawyers when I did it. Despite it being blatantly obvious the world would have been a far safer place with the defendant in prison for something/anything we couldn't possibly say he was guilty given the piss poor case they put forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 The jury seemed far more capable than the prosecution and defence lawyers when I did it. Despite it being blatantly obvious the world would have been a far safer place with the defendant in prison for something/anything we couldn't possibly say he was guilty given the piss poor case they put forward. I thought people who thought like this were weeded out of jury service these days? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I thought people who thought like this were weeded out of jury service these days? Thought like what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I thought people who thought like this were weeded out of jury service these days? They obviously take anyone they can get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Interesting bit of scouse vocabulary. When someone is acquitted, they say they "got off". Absolutely neutral on the question of whether they did it or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magister Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 a senior advocate I know who works for CPS describes juries as " almost a lottery" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peanuts Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Yes...the most frightening 12 people on the planet for any defendant. Totally unrelated to Jim McMahon but... A friend of Mrs 24 did jury service recently. Two of the jurors started an affair. Two others became golf partners. When the court rose so they could consider their verdict on a Friday morning, there was a strong caucus in favour of a quick decision - any decision. Whatever you do out there, folks, try not to involve a jury of your peers. had a similar experience when i did jury duty first case dismissed due to insuficient evedence second case even tho it was blatantly obvious they scrote was a drug dealer the evidence for the offence as presented was very very weak and mostly circumstantial but the scrote tripped himself up during cross examination so went down for it the nievity and ignorance of most of my fellow jurrers was unbelievable tho they did seem to consist of the daily mail/express reading semi retired types Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 had a similar experience when i did jury duty first case dismissed due to insuficient evedence second case even tho it was blatantly obvious they scrote was a drug dealer the evidence for the offence as presented was very very weak and mostly circumstantial but the scrote tripped himself up during cross examination so went down for it the nievity and ignorance of most of my fellow jurrers was unbelievable tho they did seem to consist of the daily mail/express reading semi retired types One problem is that the ones with the necessary brains also have the necessary brains to get out of doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magister Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 indeed I've been called twice but so far have never done it. Actually now retired I would like to do it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluear Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Imagine being in the dock and having monty burns on the jury. That's a horrendous thought Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magister Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Imagine being in the dock and having monty burns on the jury. That's a horrendous thought Imagine Dunn facing a trial in oldham....could you find 12 people with an open mind? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Imagine being in the dock and having monty burns on the jury. That's a horrendous thoughtI'd be OK, he'd not tell where 3 of my grandparents came from by my accent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluear Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Imagine Dunn facing a trial in oldham....could you find 12 people with an open mind? Guilty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Thought like what? People who thought, basically! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I'd be OK, he'd not tell where 3 of my grandparents came from by my accent. ???????????? It's not where you come from, it's where you're at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 Imagine Dunn facing a trial in oldham....could you find 12 people with an open mind? You'd find 150,000 who didn't even realise who the Latics manager is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 You'd find 150,000 who didn't even realise what Latics is. FTFY. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 You'd find 150,000 who thought Latics were Wigan. FTFY. FIFY 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 indeed I've been called twice but so far have never done it. Actually now retired I would like to do it Don't. Two weeks of my life I'll never get back. I agreed to it because I though it was important & that it'd be interesting and it fell when I wouldn't have been too busy anyway. The whole set up is a massive waste of time and tax payers money and all the highly qualified people involved, on either side, were utter morons who clearly lived in a different dimension to the people they were trying to put in/keep out of prison.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 Imagine Dunn facing a trial in oldham....could you find 12 people with an open mind? Would he instruct his defence team to play it really safe and ask no questions of the other side?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.