Andrew Mitchell MP

[Psamathe]

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]

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

Two years is a long time in politics.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

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

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,

Today, unusually, for once I agree with a Judge.

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..............

[Mick F]

...... 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".

[Psamathe]

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).

Hi,

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.

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]

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]

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]

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.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

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

[Psamathe]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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