Tory ex-Minister arrested on suspicion of rape

[Badgers]

Maybe their lawyers warned them about jigsaw identification as he has been accused at this stage not charged. That said what's the point if the BBC et al have already jumped the gun.

Edit - have read the link - sloppy subbing I would have thought.

Nah
Why would a publication owned by Lord Evgeny of Lebedev omit such a detail? The mind fair boggles.

Possibly

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

I didn’t know that East Hampshire was a constituency.

 

[brogdale]

I didn’t know that East Hampshire was a constituency.

Every day is a school day!

 

[phillm]

Have they fuck.

Some of them have even convinced themselves it’s the Prime Minister.

I discounted him early on as he is a currently serving (Prime) Minister. I should have said the list is narrow and the 'aside sneery' jokes seem to be consistent and they chime with my own prejudices. Thank god for twitter I was late to the party of understanding it.

 

[Ted Striker]

Guess Who: Tory Rapist special edition

 

[JuanTwoThree]

'Presumption of innocence, let's not be hasty, besmirch an innocent man etc'

OTOH

'Goolies, cable ties, Westminster Bridge'

 

[brogdale]

No Tory ex-minister is ever innocent.

 

[Dogsauce]

Guess Who: Tory Rapist special edition

More like Cluedo really, if the rumours are correct.

 

[maomao]

More like Cluedo really, if the rumours are correct.

That one's 64.

 

[Badgers]

Spokesperson:

These are serious allegations and it is right that they are investigated fully. The Whip has not been suspended. This decision will be reviewed once the police investigation has been concluded.

 

[brogdale]

Spokesperson:

Not consistent with May's (initial) response to the (now) convicted Elphicke:

 

[equationgirl]

Most cases of rape are within relationships IIRC.

I think it's more accurate to state that in most cases of rape, the rapist is known by the victim. But relationship implies some kind of romantic relationship and there's an awful lot of acquittance rape - the rapist and the victim know each other but are not necessarily involved in a romantic context.

Stranger rape is not the most common type of rape, that's for sure.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I think it's more accurate to state that in most cases of rape, the rapist is known by the victim. But relationship implies some kind of romantic relationship and there's an awful lot of acquittance rape - the rapist and the victim know each other but are not necessarily involved in a romantic context.

Stranger rape is not the most common type of rape, that's for sure.

This is what I meant to say.

 

[brogdale]

I think it's more accurate to state that in most cases of rape, the rapist is known by the victim. But relationship implies some kind of romantic relationship and there's an awful lot of acquittance rape - the rapist and the victim know each other but are not necessarily involved in a romantic context.

Stranger rape is not the most common type of rape, that's for sure.

Any adjectival descriptors seem essentially redundant; it is what it is.

 

[platinumsage]

I wouldn’t have thought they could suspend the whip without identifying him. Doesn’t seem much point either if parliament isn’t sitting, he’s in a cell, and a charging decision is due within hours. Just wait until then.

 

[brogdale]

I wouldn’t have thought they could suspend the whip without identifying him. Doesn’t seem much point either if parliament isn’t sitting, he’s in a cell, and a charging decision is due within hours. Just wait until then.

Of course they could suspend him without identification and announce that they'd done just that.

 

[maomao]

They wouldn't even have to actually do anything as parliament isn't sitting. If he does somehow turn out to be innocent they could reinstate him equally discreetly.

 

[andysays]

I wouldn’t have thought they could suspend the whip without identifying him. Doesn’t seem much point either if parliament isn’t sitting, he’s in a cell, and a charging decision is due within hours. Just wait until then.

This is broadly correct although, as I understand it, he isn't in a cell, he's out on bail while they decide whether or not to charge.

As has already been mentioned, IDing him may also help to ID his victim, so it's something that should be done carefully and in an appropriate manner.

 

[MickiQ]

I wouldn’t have thought they could suspend the whip without identifying him. Doesn’t seem much point either if parliament isn’t sitting, he’s in a cell, and a charging decision is due within hours. Just wait until then.

He is highly unlikely to be sitting in a cell, he will have probably spent a couple of hours sitting in one waiting for his brief but that's all, he will have been interviewed and told to return at a given time but I can't imagine he has been detained, whoever he is, he's not a threat to public safety nor a likely flight risk so the plod will have no grounds to detain him.
And much though I understand the sentiment that Tory Minister is just a fancy word for bastard, he hasn't yet been tried and convicted of anything so why should he expelled from the Tory Party yet?

 

[equationgirl]

Any adjectival descriptors seem essentially redundant; it is what it is.

I'm not getting in a debate about descriptors, I was clarifying what spookyfrank said about most rape happening in s relationship.

Rape is rape, no matter how it's described.

 

[brogdale]

And much though I understand the sentiment that Tory Minister is just a fancy word for bastard, he hasn't yet been tried and convicted of anything so why should he expelled from the Tory Party yet?

That's not even the justification the vermin have offered; they've said something vacuous about Police enquiries concluding or something.
Anyhow, the most recent precedent, set initially by May, was quite different; Elphicke was suspended PDQ.

 

[MickiQ]

That's not even the justification the vermin have offered; they've said something vacuous about Police enquiries concluding or something.
Anyhow, the most recent precedent, set initially by May, was quite different; Elphicke was suspended PDQ.

View attachment 224779

Much though it might stick in the craw to say this, they don't have to justify it. All they do have to is not interfere in the police investigations. They're not bound by precedents, Tory Party rules aren't the same things as laws.
Boris has no doubt been fully briefed on this and the decision will be made to do whatever they might think is best for the Tory Party. Which will probably be to do nothing but leave it to plod and see what happens. I doubt they are trying to protect him why should they? It won't alter their huge majority, probably won't even cost them the seat though it will probably have a different bum on it eventually.

 

[Badgers]

 

[Cid]

That's not even the justification the vermin have offered; they've said something vacuous about Police enquiries concluding or something.
Anyhow, the most recent precedent, set initially by May, was quite different; Elphicke was suspended PDQ.

View attachment 224779

Then reinstated when May needed his vote.

 

[brogdale]

Then reinstated when May needed his vote.

Yep.

 

[brogdale]

Much though it might stick in the craw to say this, they don't have to justify it. All they do have to is not interfere in the police investigations. They're not bound by precedents, Tory Party rules aren't the same things as laws.
Boris has no doubt been fully briefed on this and the decision will be made to do whatever they might think is best for the Tory Party. Which will probably be to do nothing but leave it to plod and see what happens. I doubt they are trying to protect him why should they? It won't alter their huge majority, probably won't even cost them the seat though it will probably have a different bum on it eventually.

True, just that they've nothing to lose in suspending. The decision not to do so is obviously deliberate.

 

[SpookyFrank]

True, just that they've nothing to lose in suspending. The decision not to do so is obviously deliberate.

Suggests it's someone they want to keep inside the tent. Or that they just have no reason to give a fuck.

 

[existentialist]

Suggests it's someone they want to keep inside the tent. Or that they just have no reason to give a fuck.

Well, they're Tories - of course they don't give a fuck. I'd be willing to bet that a sizeable handful of senior Tories are operating on the basis that the victim somehow had it coming to her - she was probably wearing the wrong clothes, or was a feminist, or some such.

 

[MickiQ]

Suggests it's someone they want to keep inside the tent. Or that they just have no reason to give a fuck.

They give plenty of fucks just not about the accused or accuser, May was in a difficult position with Elphicke, she was the leader of an unpopular minority government that was teetering from one crisis to the next, she probably felt that she needed to be seen to be doing the right thing (especially given she was a woman herself) and couldn't be seen to be soft on someone accused of serious crimes. Yet at the same time she was struggling to make every vote count in the middle of one political crisis afer another.
(Not that I have any sympathy for her of course)
BoZo has no such problems, he was elected less than a year ago on a wave of popular support (my keyboard shakes as I type that) with an unshakeable majority and over 4 years before it will be challenged. He can afford to let it play out, I don't think he will try and protect someone. Boris is a twat but he is a shrewd political operator and cares mostly for himself. This is a far more serious accusation than going for a 60 mile long eyesight test. If it goes to trial and the guy gets convicted then not a finger will be lifted to save him.

 

[MickiQ]

Well, they're Tories - of course they don't give a fuck. I'd be willing to bet that a sizeable handful of senior Tories are operating on the basis that the victim somehow had it coming to her - she was probably wearing the wrong clothes, or was a feminist, or some such.

Sadly I am sure you absolutely right there are a lot of men who think that way period not just senior Tories and it is a stain on our sex that there are.