The Big Red Bus

[Mfatic]

A case that will fail, with costs being awarded IMO
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Ball-v-Johnson-FV-290519.pdf

At the beginning, part way through, or at the end of the hearing?

sorry I was editing when you replied - see court transcript.

I was interested in your reasons (in your opinion) as to why you think the case will fail.

I see motorbiking doesn't want to give me his opinion of why he thinks the case will fail.
I guess I must be satisfied with his simple opinion, that it will fail, without reason.

 

[EddieM]

He's not being sued for the perceived message of spending an extra £350m a week on the NHS (although the message on the bus doesn't explicitly say that). He is being sued for saying we send £350m per week to the EU, which we don't.

On a broader note, I noticed the prosecution had been crowd funded, personally I would be wary of contributing to such things, as if (not likely in this case) the defendant wins the case with substantial damages awarded, you are now jointly liable to pay those damages.

 

[Mfatic]

The referendum was leave or remain, it only became "advisory" after remain "lost".

I'd be quite interested in how the change of status of the referendum, from 'binding' to 'advisory' came about after the result of the referendum was known.
Perhaps darrington could explain?

Perhaps he can't explain how it changed from a binding referendum to an advisory referendum.

 

[Bodd]

I see motorbiking doesn't want to give me his opinion of why he thinks the case will fail.
I guess I must be satisfied with his simple opinion, that it will fail, without reason.

I haven't followed closely. Is it not exstrem to jail him for life when you consider all the other lies told by remain.

 

[Bodd]

On a broader note, I noticed the prosecution had been crowd funded, personally I would be wary of contributing to such things, as if (not likely in this case) the defendant wins the case with substantial damages awarded, you are now jointly liable to pay those damages.

Now that's a point. Where they all made aware of this.?

 

[Mfatic]

I haven't followed closely. Is it not exstrem to jail him for life when you consider all the other lies told by remain.

If I say, "I'm going to fly tomorrow". It is not a lie if I don't fly. It was my absolute intention to fly when I said it at the time.
If I said, " I flew yesterday" and I didn't, it is a lie.

Therefore predictions are predictions. They are not lies, they may not come true, but they are not lies. They may be about what one intends, hopes to achieve, has aspirations, etc.
Distorting facts about past events are lies, intentional or not. The court case is about whether BJ intentionally, and knowingly distorted the facts.

If the court finds him guilty, the option is, up to life imprisonment. Do I want to campaign for a lesser sentence? I'll wait to see the outcome of the court case first, before I decide.

Any 'whataboutery' is irrelevant.

Now what do you think was the message on the big red bus?

 

[Bodd]

If I say, "I'm going to fly tomorrow". It is not a lie if I don't fly. It was my absolute intention to fly when I said it at the time.
If I said, " I flew yesterday" and I didn't, it is a lie.

Therefore predictions are predictions. They are not lies, they may not come true, but they are not lies. They may be about what one intends, hopes to achieve, has aspirations, etc.
Distorting facts about past events are lies, intentional or not. The court case is about whether BJ intentionally, and knowingly distorted the facts.

If the court finds him guilty, the option is, up to life imprisonment. Do I want to campaign for a lesser sentence? I'll wait to see the outcome of the court case first, before I decide.

Any 'whataboutery' is irrelevant.

Now what do you think was the message on the big red bus?

Let's fund the NHS.

I remember what annoyed me was, how much of that 350 million they intended to fund the NHS with.

 

[Mfatic]

He's not being sued for the perceived message of spending an extra £350m a week on the NHS .... He is being sued for saying we send £350m per week to the EU, which we don't.

Agreed.
Additionally, it might not be possible to bring a case against anyone else who made that claim, because, a) they may not have been in public office, b) they may not have been in a position to know the actual facts, and c) it may not be possible to prove/demonstrate that they knew the actual facts.

It is easy to prove and demonstrate that BJ knew the truth because he mentioned the real amount on a TV programme prior to the campaign. Point proven.
He was in public office. Point proven.
He was in a position to know the real amount. Point proven.

The case may hinge on, a) is the case vexatious?
b) is it politically motivated?
c) was BJ acting in a non-public office role when he made the claim?
d) did his public office role give him additional reputation and influence to affect the campaign?
e) did BJ intentionally distort the facts?

 

[Mfatic]

Let's fund the NHS.

I remember what annoyed me was, how much of that 350 million they intended to fund the NHS with.

So you believed the "we send £350 million per week to the EU"
And that some (or all) of that £350 million would be diverted to the NHS?
And that if we voted Leave, all of that would happen?

 

[Bodd]

So you believed the "we send £350 million per week to the EU"

Your not getting me on that one.. Next thing I know, I'll be before a court

 

[Bodd]

And that some (or all) of that £350 million would be diverted to the NHS?
And that if we voted Leave, all of that would happen?

I never knew if that figure was right or wrong. Why would it go into one basket of eggs...

It never influenced my vote!!!

 

[noseall]

Why would it go into one basket of eggs...

The clever people that thought of the slogan decided to use the NHS as the beneficiary for good reason. It touches the heart of virtually every single voter in the UK. It was a clever piece of advertising and it worked.

The whole shebang was a lie however and was shamelessly and repeatedly pushed in the direction of the gullible and the naïve, even though those pushing it knew it was a lie.

I think a bus saying..."let's have another vote based on facts and truth..." and see how the country fares then.

It never influenced my vote!!!

You were too busy drooling over all the other bulls hit promises.

 

[motorbiking]

We should be aware that this is not a prosecution laid by the crown prosecution service, who apply their own criteria before bringing a case https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/decision-charge . The threshold for a prosecution to be heard is very low (much lower than the CPS): Is it crime known in law and does the person meet the criteria for that. In this case the answer is yes and yes. That is all the court has considered. They have no duty to prevent the prosecutor and financiers from running up significant legal costs and facing counter claims.

The rather long winded, publication I posted explains the thinking. It is the CPS, that consider if they have enough evidence for a realistic prosecution, in this case they aren't part of the process. They could at any point, step in and continue or drop the case.

The reason IMO while this case will fail, is that the 350M claim, is pretty much the amount that the UK is due to pay under EU rules. (VAT, GNI, Customs contributions etc): £357M a week. The figure after the rebate is 250M, and after all other grants and funds is 170M. There is a strong argument that the 250M figure should have been used. All other grants and funds are tagged for specific projects, so they could not be spent on the NHS for example.

All of the above was widely reported and challenged during the campaign. The 350M was a "sexing up" of the facts and we have seen plenty of MPs and PMs sex up facts to support their case. e.g. WMD in Iraq. We then have high test of misconduct : https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/misconduct-public-office I don't think a campaign full of sexed up facts amounts to misconduct.

 

[motorbiking]

I see motorbiking doesn't want to give me his opinion of why he thinks the case will fail.
I guess I must be satisfied with his simple opinion, that it will fail, without reason.

see above - motorbiking is busy giving advice to paying clients.. you'll have to wait until he fancies a break.

 

[noseall]

the 250M figure should have been used

And Bozza knew it. The £350 mill lie should not have been used.