Was this the second Cumming?
- Thread starter SirGalahad
- Start date
- Status
Sponsored Links
That's not true, we've had the answers. Some people want blood, that's a whole different ball game.
The force said it did not consider Mr Cummings had breached the regulations when self-isolating at his father’s farm in Durham at the end of March but that the trip to Barnard Castle did constitute a “minor breach”.
Its statement said the journey “might have been a minor breach of the regulations that would have warranted police intervention”.
The statement went on: “Durham Constabulary view this is as minor because there was no apparent breach of social distancing.
Fillyboy was very pleased to hear the "Defendant's Statement" written by a skilled criminal lawyer and read out by Cummings.
It has since been examined, analysed and commented on by other skilled lawyers, familiar with statements composed for accused persons.
It was not his own words, and was carefully written to attempt to explain away the facts that have emerged.
The lawyer who wrote it has inserted multiple excuses of varying plausibility so that if one if them fails, he can try to rely on an alternative.
The dates on which he claimed to have begun, and ended, feeling ill were carefully calculated (or, by amazing good fortune, may possibly have been true) to fit round the 14-day isolation period.
Although he claims many precise dates, there was only one where he challenged his questioners to verify it by checking his phone records.
He carefully avoided stating the time and dates he contacted, or didn't, the Prime Minister. There is no mention of telephone calls, and no offer to prove them by phone records.
He omits mentioning that the house he went to was his country home.
When he fears having been observed by witnesses in the Durham area, he is carefully vague in stating when he was out in public, claiming not to know when it was. This is in contrast to the plethora of dates he uses elsewhere. This is so that, whatever time and date witnesses give, he will claim it was the unspecified day.
His description of the walk in the woods with his family is very unconvincing.
His tale about the family outing to a local beauty spot on his wife's birthday is "preposterous."
It is a mistake for anyone to assume that his carefully crafted statement is true, or accurate, or complete.
It has since been examined, analysed and commented on by other skilled lawyers, familiar with statements composed for accused persons.
It was not his own words, and was carefully written to attempt to explain away the facts that have emerged.
The lawyer who wrote it has inserted multiple excuses of varying plausibility so that if one if them fails, he can try to rely on an alternative.
The dates on which he claimed to have begun, and ended, feeling ill were carefully calculated (or, by amazing good fortune, may possibly have been true) to fit round the 14-day isolation period.
Although he claims many precise dates, there was only one where he challenged his questioners to verify it by checking his phone records.
He carefully avoided stating the time and dates he contacted, or didn't, the Prime Minister. There is no mention of telephone calls, and no offer to prove them by phone records.
He omits mentioning that the house he went to was his country home.
When he fears having been observed by witnesses in the Durham area, he is carefully vague in stating when he was out in public, claiming not to know when it was. This is in contrast to the plethora of dates he uses elsewhere. This is so that, whatever time and date witnesses give, he will claim it was the unspecified day.
His description of the walk in the woods with his family is very unconvincing.
His tale about the family outing to a local beauty spot on his wife's birthday is "preposterous."
It is a mistake for anyone to assume that his carefully crafted statement is true, or accurate, or complete.
Sponsored Links
*yawn*
Obviously, this is not what filly wants to hear.
He is a great supporter of Boris's boss, and wants him to avoid justice.
It's awkward for him to see a member of the privileged elite gaining advantage so shamelessly.
He is a great supporter of Boris's boss, and wants him to avoid justice.
It's awkward for him to see a member of the privileged elite gaining advantage so shamelessly.
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 3,305
- Reaction score
- 820
- Country
fair enough - I want blood. Boris & Cummings need to go, we have to be better than having these two run our country.
the only reason we have boris is because he was marginally less woese than Corbyn, but corbyn is gone now and as such i would like to see the back of buffoon boris and his conniving adviser cummings.
And if pretty can't get to grips with the invasion of boat people then she can pish off too.
fillyboy doesnt like detail: it exposes the truth
Cummings was central to this governments herd immunity strategy which has led to 60,000 deaths
Cumming ignored the rules he was part of setting
whilst the public followed those rules at great personal sacrifice.
and Fillyboy says: "its not fair, people don't like Cummings"
ha ha ha
you mean Boris the coward cut them off and wouldnt answer.
its hilarious you voted in this government for 'democracy' and here you are applauding this govts total lack of democracy.
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,609
- Reaction score
- 552
- Country
Awww come off it. Cummings had no friends in big old London. No friends he could call on, not even Gove the avowed christian.
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,609
- Reaction score
- 552
- Country
Lol - you have moved on from eating the s hit sandwiches provided by your leaders to now preparing it yourself.
I posted why RWR cannot understand the statement published by the Police and its meaning - he broke the rules - that is clear and confirmed.
D
Deleted2797112
No. I don't have 7,665 posts (as of 10.54am today) all in GD and all on the same subject. Nor do I have any news feeds.
Wrong.
"The number of people who believe the prime minister's senior aide Dominic Cummings should resign after he drove 260 miles during lockdown increased following the news conference he gave on Monday, a poll has suggested.
According to snap research by polling company YouGov, 59% of voters believe he broke coronavirus rules and should resign. A similar poll, carried out before his press conference, found 52% thought he should go.
Some 71% of those surveyed said Mr Cummings had breached regulations.
The online poll of more than 1,000 people was conducted at the height of the row over the prime minister's aide's decision to drive his child and ill wife from London to County Durham in March."
"Separate research by polling company Savanta suggests Mr Johnson's net approval rating has fallen from +19% on Friday to -1%."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52811812
So, surveys decide whether regulations have been breached nowdays do they? Surveys can say anything you want them too. If they surveyed you, Gally, Notchy, Nosey and Ellie would it still be 71%?
- Status
Sponsored Links
