Friday, 5 February 2010

Deja vu

The prototype for a modern MP

Picture royally shafted from here



When Charles I was finally tried and sentenced, throughout the trial and right up to the point where the axe came down on his neck...

...he refused to accept that the court had the right to try him. After that, he didn't have much to say at all.

MPs facing charges of false accounting over alleged abuse of the Parliamentary expenses system today declared that they will dispute the right of the courts to try them.


Sharpen the axe.

29 comments:

Harry MacEgan. said...

Do you think it will get anywhere O'H? If Emmerdale or Corrie is on the revolution will be postponed. Why are the English so supine?

Captain Haddock said...

Whatever the outcome of this latest "wriggle" by the Thieves (and I thought that Parliamentary privilege only extended to that which was said in the Debating Chamber, whilst the House was in session) ..

The great pity is that the result won't be the same ... Watching that would make a fine day out and would represent good value for money in paying the Congestion Charge ..

Marchamont Needham said...

And those regicides who tried the King were hunted down like dogs after 1660 and executed in the grisliest of fashions.

Parliamentary privilege does exist and may well be upheld - in my view it should be. Never mind prosecutions, Parliament should impeach these menbers and strip them of their land and properties before locking them in the Tower.

That's the flip-side of parliamentary privilege. But by the time these prosecutions fail they won't be MPs any longer so won't be subject to parliamentary sanctions.

If you want to see how it should work, google John Aislabie and South Sea Bubble.

Barking Spider said...

Would that our present "justice" system were so swift and effective!

Leg-iron said...

Cromwell died in 1658 but that didn't stop them. They dug him up and hung him anyway.

You have to love that English sense of humour.

Even if there was a Cromwell out there now, he won't be able to do much. Cromwell had an entire army, remember, and there were no CCTV's tracking him.

Besides, when it comes to corruption, Charles was a novice compared to this lot.

Joe Public said...

We must try "....the gentler tortures first."

Old Holborn said...

the bottom line is and always will be

646 of them, 61 million of us.

Honiker was lucky to get away with his life when the DDR fell to the people.

Remind them. Often.

Leg-iron said...

Marchmont Needham - If parliamentary privilege applies and they cannot be tried, then the parliamentary sanctions apply.

If they escape the parliamentary sanctions by no longer being MP's then parliamentary privilege no longer applies either, surely?

RantinRab said...

Watch channel 4 news at 8pm, (four +1). The Jim Devine interview is like a slow motion car crash.

Someone please you tube it!

Anonymous said...

Although in fairness Charles faced his end bravely not snivelling as to how unfair it all was. He may not have been a great King but he did have courage, unlike the current selection.

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZoqBUA7eVw&feature=related


it only takes 3 seconds!

Marchamont Needham said...

Leg-Iron - no I think they fall into the gap. Privilege applies to the crimes, but sanctions only apply while still MPs.

Uncharted waters!

Ron Broxted said...

When I was a young rent boy I got picked up by an MP, god he was well hung.....Oooh matron, I wonder if he claimed for me on expenses? If he did I bet he claimed more than £5 quid and a Big Mac. Probably claimed £hundreds and put me down as a duck pond or something.

Ron Broxted said...

I have a close friend who is a bit of a nutty professor like in the Rupert books. To hear him talk you would never guess he was a school teacher as he speaks like a barrow boy. I think he got his qualifications from a web site in America. Anyway he thinks Dr Kelly was murdered by global warming deniers, and that it had nothing to do with the fact that he knew the biggest weapon Saddam had was hanging between his rag head legs.
Cheeky monkey. Almost forgot I had another deletion on my telegraph tonight. Fuck them I say, I've only got one left now.

Rogerborg said...

Well, they've got a point. After all, "statute law" is just imaginary wizard-piffle that only applies on submarines in the Tropic of Cancercorn. On Tuesdays.

Isn't it? Isn't it?

the rough scales of the serpent said...

i suppose grudging congratulations to guido fawkes are in order here - he and his interns will no doubt be jumping around like frenetically excited schoolgirls and begin rubbing their naughty bits together like righteous rabbits.

in comparison to the deferential disquiet about the bloody war on middle eastern family values, the great british public will now be disgracefully and disproportionately digusted by the behaviour of these fraudulent members of parliament, despite a large number of critical citizens having committed similar crimes against their own employers and other organisations.

i sincerely hope that the judiciary will allow the protection of parliamentary privilege and rule these criminal prosecutions to be outside the jurisdiction of the courts - a decision which will provoke intense outrage amongst taxpayers, who will (if mindless enslaved employees) ransack parliament in a riot of colic, or (if mature self-employees with moral-muscle) will refuse to respond to further tax-demands. i can assure tax-refusniks that the exchequer's county court claims against them will not be thrown out of court when they (as defendants) reasonably argue that the civil courts of this land do not constitute a fair and impartial tribunal in accordance with article six of the european convention on human rights - the tax-sponging judiciary being as bent, corrupt and self-serving as their political counterparts.

jim deviner said...

02:08

quite right:

everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law

and if we, as members of parliament, have to face a public jury, we will surely be hung, drawn and quartered.

Anonymous said...

Fellow readers, I must point out that the 1689 Bill of Rights is one with which the "Freeman movement" wishes to be in force for such Freeman.

After study I conclude that in fact the 1689 Bill of Rights does in fact mean that these MPs should (and will) face a judgement by Parliament and NO other court anywhere outside Parliament.

If not, then Freeman can wave goodbye to such support from the very same 1689 Act which they attest to.

OK, so the "powers that be" in the UK will not wish nor want the MPs to be able to use the Act as it will shine a light upon it for everyone else to see. Therefore I suppose that various measures will be taken to try and ensure that it never comes to them having to use the Act. By this they either are suddenly let off (e.g. not in the public interest after all) or they die ahead of legal proceedings ever getting to that stage.

operation blank vote said...

02:08, 02:18

to avoid further unnecessary cruelty to both civilian populations in the middle-east, and to the privileged pigs of parliamentary impunity, i strongly recommend that everyone exercizes their legal and democratic right not to bother participating in forthcoming elections until further notice.

illiterate freeloader said...

02:39

what a cunt! but rather than break the habit of a lifetime, i'll still continue to chuck all official correspondence in the bin.

02:08

i sincerely hope that the judiciary will allow the protection of parliamentary privilege and rule these criminal prosecutions to be outside the jurisdiction of the courts - a decision which will provoke intense outrage amongst taxpayers, who will (if mindless enslaved employees) ransack parliament in a riot of colic, or (if mature self-employees with moral-muscle) will refuse to respond to further tax-demands. i can assure tax-refusniks that the exchequer's county court claims against them will not be thrown out of court when they (as defendants) reasonably argue that the civil courts of this land do not constitute a fair and impartial tribunal in accordance with article six of the european convention on human rights - the tax-sponging judiciary being as bent, corrupt and self-serving as their political counterparts.

you forgot the unemployed - who will continue to smoke skunk-spliff until the dole dries-up and they have to find a job. bugger.

compromised catalyst said...

02:39

don't fret - the turf accountants say it's odds on the law being a total ass, the judges totally ignoring all jurisprudence as per fucking usual and throwing the worms to the lions.

jiminy cricket said...

02:39, 03:40

great! whatever happens i'll definitely be doing some time in the long grass then!

Captain Swing said...

Bill of Rights says

That the Freedome of Speech and Debates or Proceedings in Parlyament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any Court or Place out of Parlyament.


Surely that doesnt cover fiddling expenses or false accounting because they are not proceedings in parliament.

woman on a raft said...

Cheeky buggers. They've done very well with Kier Starmer doing his best to get the charges minimized.

If they were facing any kind of determined prosecutor they'd be up for much worse than a fine and some community service. Ask Mr Riley, who carried on claiming benefits while living in Thailand with his ladyfriend. His argument was that he was entitled to the benefits on account of his back (true) but he got better value for the money there, and the weather did him no end of good, keeping him out of hospital here. Also true. He was jailed.

As for the parliamentary privilege card; they deserve to be flogged just for abusing the concept. It is there to protect honest men from the tyranny of the Crown or other malefactors, such as wicked lawyers who reckon they can send threatening letters about what MPs can or cannot say on the floor of the House.

I will get my knitting and am booking a seat for when the tumbril rolls them to the guillotine. Such things happen.

Dave said...

"he refused to accept that the court had the right to try him"

The same argument that Saddam, Milosevic and the other criminal politicians used. String em up.

Leg-iron said...

Operation Blank Vote -

If you don't want to vote, go to the polling station, take the voting paper into the booth, wait a minute, then put it in the box. With no mark on it.

If the 70% who don't vote did that, it would make quite a mess.

major rufus cobb said...

09:42

That the Freedome of Speech and Debates or Proceedings in Parlyament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any Court or Place out of Parlyament.

this is going to mean an interminably prolonged and protracted legal pow-pow about the definitions of 'parlyament' and 'proceedings'.

godammit!

if we are ever to have law and order in the west, the first thing we gotta do is take out all the lawyers and shoot 'em down like dogs!

Clive said...

"If you don't want to vote, go to the polling station, take the voting paper into the booth, wait a minute, then put it in the box. With no mark on it."

Better: As soon as you're given your voting paper, tear it into quarters and hand it straight back.

variations on a theme of fuck you said...

00:51

no, eat it - it's your inedible democratic right.

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails