Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Turned Out Nice Again

Plebgate - Mitchell Facing Ruin

Recommended Posts

Crikey! What was he thinking? Let's put everything on red and spin the wheel.

"If Mitchell hadn't sued, the scorecard would have been:

5 Plods dismissed for gross misconduct:
1 Plod sentenced to a year in jail for misconduct in public office:
3 West Midlands Police Federation members under IPCC investigation:
an apology to Mitchell from the Met Commissioner:
the Channel 4 News CCTV clip showing the Downing St Plods were at least partly lying: and
Mitchell's almost complete political rehabilitation.

The hubris & arrogance he seems to have exhibited in deciding this wasn't enough has now obscured all of this."

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/11/what-next-for-andrew-mitchell/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether he said that word or not (I personally suspect that he probably did), he's now proved himself to be a complete idiot and has entirely brought this on himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do worry that there is an illogical view that you can't lose if you are one of the current Tories.

I believe Cameron is made of the same stuff, a natural gambler who thinks he can dictate and win every time. So far we have only lost aqnd become isolated, Cameron's diplomatic skills are even short of Putin's...EU, FIFA...the list goes on.

The same applies to the EU in out referendum, don't think they want to exit, but a certainty it will all go right and no plan B. Probably comes from a silver spoon upbringing where everything always falls into place, life isn't like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also confused by how the judge could reach the conclusion that he hadn't said it. Oh well.

I personally don't believe he did, as the word used by the upper class is "Prole" not "Pleb"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also confused by how the judge could reach the conclusion that he hadn't said it.

Exactly, no one could make a judgement as fact without being there or having solid witnesses or a recording. What makes a judge think he knows what was said with such lack of evidence. Can judges not just say they 'dunno'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, no one could make a judgement as fact without being there or having solid witnesses or a recording. What makes a judge think he knows what was said with such lack of evidence. Can judges not just say they 'dunno'.

Mitchell brought the action...for him to prove. Not clear how that works with the policeman though, his action should similarly have failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He deserves everything that happens to him. The fact that he was stupid enough to bring the action, means he warrants little if any sympathy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was suprised at the judgement

I don't think Mitchell was arrogant as I think he believes he was tidying up the last 'wrong' - setting the record straight.

But did he need to set the record straight ? Only he knows.

Was he was foolish to take the gamble given the matter was pretty much forgotten ? Probably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't suprised at all. The rule is that you should basically never take libel actions unless you can be 99% sure of winning (or unless you have money to burn).

It was effectively like walking into a casino with the odds heavily against him.

It just shows his arrogance. Presumably he thought the court would inevitably believe his version of events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get how if all the other stuff happened that you mention, how a judge could say he probably did say pleb..

Read today's Times, and other sources such as two links below, and other sources too beyond the few paragraphs in Spectator.

The judge referred to significant evidence from John Randall MP, who testified that he was surprised to read a verbatim account of Mr Mitchell's words in The Sunday Times after being told by his Tory colleague that he could not recall exactly what he said.

No one forced Mitchell to bring an action for libel, with all the risks and costs. At least PC Ian Richardson can finally have some peace with his reputation intact, after being cleared 4 times in internal investigations, then all the stress of Mitchell's libel action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't suprised at all. The rule is that you should basically never take libel actions unless you can be 99% sure of winning (or unless you have money to burn).

It was effectively like walking into a casino with the odds heavily against him.

It just shows his arrogance. Presumably he thought the court would inevitably believe his version of events.

I would agree with the first two sentences, I just don't think the sentence third follows, necessarily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an interesting judgement. Libel cases in the UK have been massively skewed against the defendant. In effect, the defendant must prove their innocence, whereas the claimant only has to make a claim.

There is a burgeoning Libel tourism in the UK for this reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant see how an irate cyclist being told to dismount and walk through the pedestrian gate, probably has a good verbal moan about the jobsworths on the gate ( told to be by the cyclists colleagues) turns into a bonanza for the lawyers, a PC for some reason claiming to be there and wasnt, and all this.

Should have been a meeting next day between the copper and the MP to shake hands and forget it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant see how an irate cyclist being told to dismount and walk through the pedestrian gate, probably has a good verbal moan about the jobsworths on the gate ( told to be by the cyclists colleagues) turns into a bonanza for the lawyers, a PC for some reason claiming to be there and wasnt, and all this.

Should have been a meeting next day between the copper and the MP to shake hands and forget it.

Ego.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant see how an irate cyclist being told to dismount and walk through the pedestrian gate, probably has a good verbal moan about the jobsworths on the gate ( told to be by the cyclists colleagues) turns into a bonanza for the lawyers, a PC for some reason claiming to be there and wasnt, and all this.

Should have been a meeting next day between the copper and the MP to shake hands and forget it.

The libel action did not need to happen.

Times - pg37 Opinion

The simple sword of truth has always had two edges. Andrew Mitchell could have saved himself a great deal of money and embarrassment had he paused to reflect on this maxim before launching one of the most prominent libel actions of the last decade. Instead, he plunged in, suing News Group Newspapers over an allegation in The Sun that he had called Toby Rowland, a police constable, a "f***ing pleb" when he was forbidden (etc etc)... The action was a foolhardy gamble.... .... . [..].... Mr Mitchell should never have brought the suit, ,,,, A simple apology would have done the trick. A little common sense courtesy would have been enough to avert this whole disgraceful episode.

Separately, in each of the other cases where people involved in Plebgate have lost their positions, been sent to jail (one police officer.. out after 6 months of a 12 month sentence from memory), it appears to me, from what I have read, the outcomes have been justified against their actions where they were at fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also confused by how the judge could reach the conclusion that he hadn't said it. Oh well.

I personally don't believe he did, as the word used by the upper class is "Prole" not "Pleb"

According to sources quoted in today's Times, 'pleb' was certainly used at Eton and other bastions of privilege.

I think he probably did say it. IIRC he never categorically denied it, he just kept saying he 'did not recall' using the word, which is the sort of strategy beloved of those who are careful not to tell an outright lie, in case they get found out. Much safer to say you can't exactly remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone may be excellent and proficient at their job, but nobody with a big flaw in their temperament/personality/fuse can bring the best talent to the top of the game.. arrogance, temper, ego, entitlement and self importance can, and will kill the best of anyone.....lead by example. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mistake he made was not realising that someone, somewhere, more powerful than him, didn't want him in his cabinet job any longer. He wrongly thought this was a matter that could be rectified through the courts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also confused by how the judge could reach the conclusion that he hadn't said it. Oh well.

I personally don't believe he did, as the word used by the upper class is "Prole" not "Pleb"

I sometimes refer to the plebs sordida, which must make me working class then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sometimes refer to the plebs sordida, which must make me working class then.

Well if you're going to have sex with them it's no good acting surprised when they give you a yeast infection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   224 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.