Andy Coulson arrested [now charged]

[likesfish]

We had two glaswegian Cid turn up in brighton to "collect a wrong un" unfortunatly he'd all ready been knicked for something else.
Funny thing was one of the scottish drunks used to like to stand at reception swearing away at the staff safe in the knowledge we hadn't a clue what he was saying and would usually smile andoffer him a cup of tea.
Small glaswegian female dective goes off like a bomb and lets loose with a tirade had no idea what she was saying either and sandy slunk off looking sorry for himself

 

[equationgirl]

Worth pointing out that in scotland being charged as Coulson has been is not the same as being prosecuted - the procurator fiscal has now to decide if this is to happen.

Yes. Although the police tend not to make the case to the fiscal unless there's a good chance of that happening.

 

[equationgirl]

It warmed the cockles of my heart that Coulson was taken to Govan station (a mere stone's throw from Ibrox stadium), with only a KFC an a half-derelict industrial estate nearby. Certainly no taxi rank, train station or underground close by - and at 9.30pm probably too late for the last train or flight to London. I don't think he would have made the sleeper train either.

 

[redcogs]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31594152

The Coulson scum needs a good long term in Scotland's finest clink in order to reflect upon the depths of his depravity.

 

[brogdale]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31594152

The Coulson scum needs a good long term in Scotland's finest clink in order to reflect upon the depths of his depravity.

A feel-good news story.

 

[equationgirl]

I'm sure they're prepping a bunk in either Peterhead or the Bar-L for him as we speak

Trial set for April 21st. Coulson in the High Court today for a pre-trial hearing of some kind.

 

[nino_savatte]

The bastard's been cleared.

David Cameron’s former director of communications, Andy Coulson, has been cleared of lying in court after a Scottish judge threw out charges of alleged perjury.

Lord Burns told Coulson at the high court in Edinburgh he had been formally acquitted of lying under oath about his knowledge of phone hacking at the News of the World while he was the paper’s editor.

The judge’s dramatic decision came following five days of legal debate and deliberations after Coulson’s defence advocate, Murdo MacLeod QC, successfully argued that Scottish prosecutors had misunderstood the Scottish law on perjury.

Burns had delivered his ruling on Monday morning with the jury absent from court but then agreed to a Crown request for time to consider an appeal. He told Coulson, 47, from Preston in Kent, on Monday that, pending the appeal: “I must suspend the acquittal that I have just given.”
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/03/andy-coulson-cleared-of-perjury-in-scottish-court

 

[krink]

The bastard's been cleared.

just heard that

 

[redcogs]

Cleared by his establishment mates - not a jury. Fucking disgusting - but typical.

The courts, north and south of the border, are not there to deliver justice, they are there to administer class prejudice on behalf of the wealthy.

Outrageous that this Tory scum has walked free. Can there be a riot please?

 

[killer b]

the judge's comments to the jury are here - doesn't sound like a mate tbh. http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/Upload/Documents/HMAvAndrewCoulsonjuryexplanation030615.pdf

Not every lie amounts to perjury. he's still a liar.

 

[cantsin]

We had two glaswegian Cid turn up in brighton to "collect a wrong un" unfortunatly he'd all ready been knicked for something else.
Funny thing was one of the scottish drunks used to like to stand at reception swearing away at the staff safe in the knowledge we hadn't a clue what he was saying and would usually smile andoffer him a cup of tea.
Small glaswegian female dective goes off like a bomb and lets loose with a tirade had no idea what she was saying either and sandy slunk off looking sorry for himself

what a load of wank

 

[alan_]

the judge's comments to the jury are here - doesn't sound like a mate tbh. http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/Upload/Documents/HMAvAndrewCoulsonjuryexplanation030615.pdf

Not every lie amounts to perjury. he's still a liar.

That's what I thought it meant, that it is not enough to merely lie under oath, but that the lie must have some additional relevance to elements being examined. I have never come across this defence before.

 

[killer b]

that's the layman's version. the full judgement is here: http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=c377daa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

 

[killer b]

It sounds to me like, while it could have been argued by the prosecution that the lie was relevant, they didn't make a case (that convinced the judge).

 

[redcogs]

Coulson is a liar, an organiser of the most repellent and extraordinary corruption within the media, and probably elsewhere when he was spin adviser to Cameron.

He has walked because the jury were prevented from deliberating on the matter by legal arguments presented by establishment lackeys to a higher establishment figure who wears a strange medieval robe and wig to emphasise his credentials.

Scum Coulson has been aquitted by his mates, or mates of his mates.

There has been no justice here, just a denial of it.

i wouldn't be shocked to see Coulson enter government circles at some future point - the vermin are so brazen they can get away with anything.

 

[8115]

I knew it was too good to be true.

 

[brogdale]

 

[Fedayn]

the judge's comments to the jury are here - doesn't sound like a mate tbh. http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/Upload/Documents/HMAvAndrewCoulsonjuryexplanation030615.pdf

Not every lie amounts to perjury. he's still a liar.

Indeed, however under Scots law there is a difference between lying under oath and perjury, as such the bizarre sounding "not every lie amounts to perjury" is, contrary to what we wopuld all assume, in fact legally speaking and ergo corerctly in this context, true. The important difference is whether the alleged perjured evidence was a material factor in the verdict. Now as long ago as his perjury trial in 2010 Sheridan admitted that Coulsons evidence was not relevant to his defence. In other words Sheridan was admitting what everyone was thinking re the relevance of Coulsons evidence. Back in October the issue of relevance to Coulsons trial was being discussed but was never actually dealt with.

 

[Fedayn]

That was the most fucked up bit, the Judge was clear he lied, merely not perjured himself, then Coulson goes outside and lies about not being a liar even though he's just been shown to be a liar in front of a court....

 

[killer b]

Indeed, however under Scots law there is a difference between lying under oath and perjury, as such the bizarre sounding "not every lie amounts to perjury" is, contrary to what we wopuld all assume, in fact legally speaking and ergo corerctly in this context, true. The important difference is whether the alleged perjured evidence was a material factor in the verdict. Now as long ago as his perjury trial in 2010 Sheridan admitted that Coulsons evidence was not relevant to his defence. In other words Sheridan was admitting what everyone was thinking re the relevance of Coulsons evidence. Back in October the issue of relevance to Coulsons trial was being discussed but was never actually dealt with.

Yeah, it doesn't seem to me to be a matter of the establishment looking after it's own here - just that what he did wasn't perjury.

 

[Fedayn]

Yeah, it doesn't seem to me to be a matter of the establishment looking after it's own here - just that what he did wasn't perjury.

It would seem that way, but it's a bit of a 'head fuck' given the rather understandable notion most of us, until yesterday had, that if you lie under oath then you perjured yourself.

As an aside a mate of mines a lawyer kinda explained it as 'Like the offside rule, ie you're offside but not interfering with play"... Or, say you were in the dock and said during your evidence claimed that whilst walking down the street you saw a man in a kaftan balancing a tub of lard on his head. Now if that didn't happen, and if not then has no bearing on the case, you are effectively lying under oath, but it's not perjury as it isn't materially relative. Confused? We all were yesterday?!

 

[DotCommunist]

so if someone lied in court so as not to not incriminate themselves on an unrelated case, thats not perjury in scotland?

 

[butchersapron]

so if someone lied in court so as not to not incriminate themselves on an unrelated case, thats not perjury in scotland?

Not if it doesn't materially effect the outcome of the case they're there for.

 

[8115]

so if someone lied in court so as not to not incriminate themselves on an unrelated case, thats not perjury in scotland?

Not if it's a special kind of lie that posh people with tory mates tell, obviously.

 

[butchersapron]

Not if it's a special kind of lie that posh people with tory mates tell, obviously.

No, actually read about both the case and the law. Links are above.

 

[killer b]

Not if it's a special kind of lie that posh people with tory mates tell, obviously.

Not really. The judgement quotes a number of previous cases the decision was based on, and isn't particularly generous to Coulson. I know it smarts, but it isn't always privilege at work (although id imagine the expensive lawyers money brings would have been very helpful)

 

[8115]

Not really. The judgement quotes a number of previous cases the decision was based on, and isn't particularly generous to Coulson. I know it smarts, but it isn't always privilege at work (although id imagine the expensive lawyers money brings would have been very helpful)

Ok, it's a special kind of lie posh people with tory mates tell after consulting their lawyers.

 

[killer b]

It just isn't. Get over it.

 

[DotCommunist]

interesting. I suppose its similar in a way (but not the same) to americas 'taking the fifth' in order that legally, and morally, you shouldn't have to grass yourself up when the case has nothing to do with your misdeeds. If it was a trial on your misdeeds and you lied, perjury.

 

[Fedayn]

Not really. The judgement quotes a number of previous cases the decision was based on, and isn't particularly generous to Coulson. I know it smarts, but it isn't always privilege at work (although id imagine the expensive lawyers money brings would have been very helpful)

Sort of, though even a non expensive non lawyer, ie Sheridan, made clear in 2010, that Coulsons evidence wasn't relevant to his defence/charge, and he was correct.