Andrew Mitchell MP

Psamathe
Posts: 10607
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby Psamathe » 27 Nov 2014, 5:56pm

meic wrote:Today, unusually, for once I agree with a Judge. :mrgreen:

Likewise.
Some of those appearing in the trial telling of their experiences made him sound like ... well I wont say 'cos I don't want him going after me as well.

Ian

thirdcrank
Posts: 28685
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby thirdcrank » 27 Nov 2014, 7:42pm

Regulator wrote:If anyone wants show their support for Mr Mitchell, and highlight how poorly cyclists are dealt with by the police and other authority figures , his email is: andrew.mitchell.mp@parliament.uk :wink:


Two years is a long time in politics.

User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 11056
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby NATURAL ANKLING » 27 Nov 2014, 7:54pm

Hi,
The ch 4 news presenter at 7 was a bit OTT, also what about the SEVEN police that have been sent to jail - kicked out - under investigation.

To me the " *&^%$£" Pleb" in so minor compared with the obvious conspiracy of the police officers.

Also PC anti bike jobsworth had not written in is note book at all in....SEVEN years :?

Then he sees the crime of the century :roll:
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivy
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.

User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 11056
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby NATURAL ANKLING » 27 Nov 2014, 7:57pm

Hi,
meic wrote:Today, unusually, for once I agree with a Judge. :mrgreen:



Would you like to be found guilty on... "All Probable likelyhood" :?:

His word against the PC / sergent whatever.

The Insulted Policeman lied about the "Witnesses" that were at the gate :!:

Thats OK then..............
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivy
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 47496
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby Mick F » 27 Nov 2014, 8:11pm

...... but it wasn't a criminal trial.
It was a libel case AM against The Sun, and AM was unable to make his case stick.

Balance of probabilities, not "Guilty or Not Guilty".
Mick F. Cornwall

Psamathe
Posts: 10607
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby Psamathe » 27 Nov 2014, 8:16pm

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:Hi,
The ch 4 news presenter at 7 was a bit OTT, also what about the SEVEN police that have been sent to jail - kicked out - under investigation.

To me the " *&^%$£" Pleb" in so minor compared with the obvious conspiracy of the police officers.

Maybe, except that was dealt with some time ago and was reported then. Today the news/issue is that Mitchell lost his libel cases and the judge thought he had said the words he now claims not to have said (and I say "now" becuause it was reported in the trial that 5 days after the "event" Mitchell told a friend he could not remember the words he used).

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:Hi,
meic wrote:Today, unusually, for once I agree with a Judge. :mrgreen:

Would you like to be found guilty on... "All Probable likelyhood" :?:

As it came down to one mans word against another, it was all the judge could really find. With no categoric proof (e.g. a tape recording) judge could not say much else.

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:Also PC anti bike jobsworth ...

Why do you say anti-bike. From what I have seen reported he was just following security orders and nothing to do with being anti-bike.

I think what makes this news (and I feel it is news that is worth reporting) is how it illustrates the nature of out MPs. I think it quite fair that we expect reasonable standards of behaviour from our MPs. We do not accept e.g. a load of students enjoying a meal and then trashing the restaurant. Even if they are all wearing £3k DJs. Oh, sorry Dave, forgot that you, Boris, Gideon, etc. spent your student days acting in such a manner.... It comes down to the sort of person you are.

Ian

irc
Posts: 4608
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby irc » 27 Nov 2014, 9:05pm

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:The Insulted Policeman lied about the "Witnesses" that were at the gate :!:

Thats OK then..............


Did he? Did the judge say that today?

The CCTV shows several witnesses outside the gate.

https://skwalker1964.wordpress.com/2012 ... -c4-claim/

Psamathe
Posts: 10607
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby Psamathe » 27 Nov 2014, 9:29pm

irc wrote:
NATURAL ANKLING wrote:The Insulted Policeman lied about the "Witnesses" that were at the gate :!:

Thats OK then..............


Did he? Did the judge say that today?

The CCTV shows several witnesses outside the gate.

https://skwalker1964.wordpress.com/2012 ... -c4-claim/

What seemed to have happened is that Mitchell and/or his supporters got hold of the CCTV and released/leaked a carefully edited version. Some other source released more and in the "more" there are clearly the "several" people the police recorded in their logs. Channel 4 did a cursory skim over the video, edited it more and spun a "it's all a conspiracy" story. For analysis of the Mtichell released bits and the "more" bits he/his supporters edited out see http://skwalker1964.wordpress.com/2012/12/30/definitive-video-shows-plebgate-should-not-damage-confidence-in-police/ (actually it's pretty dull and you will end you appreciating there were several people and will come back to asking for those wasted 6+ minutes of your life back !!). Shorter one from the Guardian showing a good exterior view where several people seem to note something going on when Mitchell is "dealing" with the Police Officer http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2014/sep/01/plebgate-cctv-video-footage-metropolitan-police.

But to be honest, I consider the "did he say or not say plebs" a bit of a non-issue. The real issue is that because police there for his (and others) safety would not break their regulations because he wanted to cycle through the main gates, he threw a tantrum and started swearing and using bad language at those Police doing their jobs. Given he had already stopped, pushing his bike through a gate vs riding through the car gates is not inconvenience to justify his very poor behaviour.

Ian

thirdcrank
Posts: 28685
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby thirdcrank » 27 Nov 2014, 9:42pm

I'm surprised anybody still sees this as a story about discrimination against cyclists.

From time to time we get threads about altercations / road rage incidents and I've often urged that people try to keep their temper if they want to be believed later. This is from the Garudian, quoting part of the judge's ruling:

Mitchell lost his temper

The judge said the MP was not in a state of mind that evening either to measure his words carefully or remember precisely what they were. He was satisfied that Mitchell did lose his temper and it was part of common experience of life that a loss of temper could lead both to loss of inhibition in speaking and recollection of what was said. “It follows that his adamant denial of uttering the words alleged is not of itself determinative of the issues.”


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... libel-case

Beyond this, there are wider questions about our defamation laws.

User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 11056
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby NATURAL ANKLING » 27 Nov 2014, 10:11pm

Hi,
OK so I was off out shopping at LIDL and I now feel perked up and more focused :)

The point I would like to make is that, the media are just on the story at the moment before they move on to another sad soul.

I agree that people who lord over us should be on best behaviour.

But the police officers who went to jail etc, etc, show some obvious agreement / whatever, call it anything you like, in behaviour that does need closer scutiny, on the basis of "why did seven police officers (3 still under investagation) do what they did....am I the only one who thinks this runs much deeper or am I a sad old fart :?:
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivy
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.

Psamathe
Posts: 10607
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby Psamathe » 27 Nov 2014, 10:25pm

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:But the police officers who went to jail etc, etc, show some obvious agreement / whatever, call it anything you like, in behaviour that does need closer scutiny, on the basis of "why did seven police officers (3 still under investagation) do what they did....am I the only one who thinks this runs much deeper or am I a sad old fart :?:

I think there are actually two stories/issues here. Mitchell and his tantrum at the gates; and then the issue of the Police false witnesses (those in jail and under investigation). I suspect that the False Witness story used Mitchell as an excuse to attack the government, and Mitchell presented himself as a far easier target than the Home Secretary (who they would have far preferred to "bring down" given her relationship with the Police in general). But that is just my opinion.

Ian

AndyK
Posts: 811
Joined: 17 Aug 2007, 2:08pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby AndyK » 27 Nov 2014, 11:34pm

Psamathe wrote:I think there are actually two stories/issues here.

Three, actually. Bringing it back on topic for this forum, I'd like to know whether the Met Police still has a policy of treating government ministers like plebs - sorry, second-class citizens - if they choose to ride a bike rather than be driven round in the ministerial limo? In the excitement everyone's forgotten that the altercation started because by choosing to cycle, Mr Mitchell suddenly wasn't important enough to have the main gate opened for him.

Psamathe
Posts: 10607
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby Psamathe » 27 Nov 2014, 11:38pm

AndyK wrote:
Psamathe wrote:I think there are actually two stories/issues here.

Three, actually. Bringing it back on topic for this forum, I'd like to know whether the Met Police still has a policy of treating government ministers like plebs - sorry, second-class citizens - if they choose to ride a bike rather than be driven round in the ministerial limo? In the excitement everyone's forgotten that the altercation started because by choosing to cycle, Mr Mitchell suddenly wasn't important enough to have the main gate opened for him.

My impression is that it (Security Policy) has nothing to do with bikes but is about security (i.e. open the main gates as rarely as possible as they represent a greater risk). I don't get the impression this is anti-cycling at all.

Ian

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby beardy » 27 Nov 2014, 11:41pm

If you are really important, like the Prime Minister, do they open the big car gates so you can walk out even?

Or is that just for Eric Pickles?

Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Postby Bicycler » 28 Nov 2014, 12:05am

Psamathe wrote:
AndyK wrote:
Psamathe wrote:I think there are actually two stories/issues here.

Three, actually. Bringing it back on topic for this forum, I'd like to know whether the Met Police still has a policy of treating government ministers like plebs - sorry, second-class citizens - if they choose to ride a bike rather than be driven round in the ministerial limo? In the excitement everyone's forgotten that the altercation started because by choosing to cycle, Mr Mitchell suddenly wasn't important enough to have the main gate opened for him.

My impression is that it (Security Policy) has nothing to do with bikes but is about security (i.e. open the main gates as rarely as possible as they represent a greater risk). I don't get the impression this is anti-cycling at all.

That's simple then everybody can be dropped off outside and walk through the gates :wink: