I didn't follow this story really, but the bit I did read was that the reporter asked her for drugs and she put him onto someone who could sell them to him. That was it. Glad it's been thrown out and can't see that drugs are going to be the downfall of any celeb, it's kind of expected.
I didn't follow this story really, but the bit I did read was that the reporter asked her for drugs and she put him onto someone who could sell them to him. That was it. Glad it's been thrown out and can't see that drugs are going to be the downfall of any celeb, it's kind of expected.
That is still a criminal offence. Shame the trial didn't go through.
Looks like Tulisa has rubbed you up the wrong way.
However why not give the girl a break, she now gets dragged to Court by another "Man" who wants to take advantage of her in a malicious and deliberate way.
All the terrible things going on in the World and The Sun has to fabricate, waste money and set up Tulisa. Would actually love to know why and with a clear understandable reason from them. Just ditching the Faker is not enough. Why?
Looks like Tulisa has rubbed you up the wrong way.
However why not give the girl a break, she now gets dragged to Court by another "Man" who wants to take advantage of her in a malicious and deliberate way.
All the terrible things going on in the World and The Sun has to fabricate, waste money and set up Tulisa. Would actually love to know why and with a clear understandable reason from them. Just ditching the Faker is not enough. Why?
The Sun's basically caused tax payers money to be wasted on this.
It's not a shame. The star witness is a lying creep, this wasn't justice in any way.
No doubt , she's not the first 'celeb' to be caught in this way , I'd imagine the boxer herbie Hide is kicking himself for his guilty plea .
Ultimately greedy fame hungry celebs get sucked in and **** themselves for a chance 5 more mins in the spotlight. I don't have a massive amount of sympathy but Its tittle tattle so don't spin this public interest prosecution rubbish as it certainly doesn't fulfil the rules of evidence .
It's amazing when you think how many stories seem to be out there , over the years , to be exposed and we get this dross . Some showbiz stuff ok but at the top level and instead journalists take risks that lead to a judges comments like this for tullisa and a bag of bing bong , crazy .
No doubt , she's not the first 'celeb' to be caught in this way , I'd imagine the boxer herbie Hide is kicking himself for his guilty plea .
Ultimately greedy fame hungry celebs get sucked in and **** themselves for a chance 5 more mins in the spotlight. I don't have a massive amount of sympathy but Its tittle tattle so don't spin this public interest prosecution rubbish as it certainly doesn't fulfil the rules of evidence .
It's amazing when you think how many stories seem to be out there , over the years , to be exposed and we get this dross . Some showbiz stuff ok but at the top level and instead journalists take risks that lead to a judges comments like this for tullisa and a bag of bing bong , crazy .
So agree just Crazy. Hope the State and Tulisa can hit Suns pocket as they don't seem to understand anything else.
So agree just Crazy. Hope the State and Tulisa can hit Suns pocket as they don't seem to understand anything else.
I think tullisa may find it hard given her 'complicity' in the events that unfolded , although clearly she's been massively played by the paper . I'd love her to have a successful civil action but who knows , the judges comments mean I'd expect to see the state become involved .
That is still a criminal offence. Shame the trial didn't go through.
How can it go ahead when the person who provided the evidence has been found to be lieing a judge cannot ignore that as thats what the whole case is based upon, to continue would be unfair and a fishing trip.
I thought the basis of the case was she told a reporter where he could buy drugs, she wasn't the dealer?
This is precisely why the charge was "being concerned in the supply of" and not dealing.
According to her statement, she's said to have told Mahmood's driver that she disapproved of drugs and the driver apparently "changed his mind" after meeting Mahmood.
That's basically what the case was tossed on.
She's not been "cleared" or found not guilty, the case is tossed on a technicality. I wouldn't be surprised if this is why her co-defendant pleaded guilty last week because he was probably told that the case wouldn't go any further due to Mahmood's actions and any guilty plea would simply be struck from the records.
This exactly, it has been shown over the years that drug related stories doesn't do harm to careers. All you have to do is take a look at The Rolling Stones, Ozzy Osbourne, the late Amy Winehouse to see that negative publicity doesn't stop people from buying their material. It is the case of releasing sh!t material harms record sales.
This is precisely why the charge was "being concerned in the supply of" and not dealing.
According to her statement, she's said to have told Mahmood's driver that she disapproved of drugs and the driver apparently "changed his mind" after meeting Mahmood.
That's basically what the case was tossed on.
She's not been "cleared" or found not guilty, the case is tossed on a technicality. I wouldn't be surprised if this is why her co-defendant pleaded guilty last week because he was probably told that the case wouldn't go any further due to Mahmood's actions and any guilty plea would simply be struck from the records.
Ridiculous decision.
Another one of those cases where those pesky judges know less about the law than DS posters , clearly the judge felt the prospect of a key witness lying somewhat undermined the prosecution case.
Regardless of that though I'm also deeply uncomfortable with " I can make you famous , I can make you so so rich & get you info the movies . Do you know anyone who can get me cocaine ?"... The judge said "he'd gone much further than any police sting could" , effectively he's suggested that tulisa was subject to entrapment . As I said in my earlier post I've no real sympathy with her but for me it's gossip rather than something that should find itself at a court . The man who supplied the actual drugs then fine but the facilitator it seems weak to me and it also seems the trial judge agreed .
She's not been "cleared" or found not guilty, the case is tossed on a technicality. I wouldn't be surprised if this is why her co-defendant pleaded guilty last week because he was probably told that the case wouldn't go any further due to Mahmood's actions and any guilty plea would simply be struck from the records.
Ridiculous decision.
This is simply not true.
Firstly, she has been cleared. That is a fact. That is what happens when a judge dismisses a case.
Another one of those cases where those pesky judges know less about the law than DS posters , clearly the judge felt the prospect of a key witness lying somewhat undermined the prosecution case.
I don't claim to be a legal expert - never have done. And i'm not disputing the actual reasons for tossing the case at all - from a point of law, it shouldn't have continued.
She's on tape explaining the code for the "sweets" and telling Mahmood she can "sort him out", as well as ringing her co-defendant to ask him if he had the "sweets". The text messages between them are further testament to her claim to be able to "sort him out".
And the fact that Mahmood was then given the number of her co-defendant to enable him to do the actual deal all points to someone being quite willingly involved in the sequence of events - and most likely not for the first time either.
Comments
The case was admittedly more of a final nail in the coffin, but when the story first broke it was pretty damning.
Her audition tape was so promising as well!
Really? Her technique was sloppy for me.
Ooer missis
I'm sure a whole host of reality TV show opportunities await her!
The jungle beckons ;-)
That is still a criminal offence. Shame the trial didn't go through.
Looks like Tulisa has rubbed you up the wrong way.
However why not give the girl a break, she now gets dragged to Court by another "Man" who wants to take advantage of her in a malicious and deliberate way.
All the terrible things going on in the World and The Sun has to fabricate, waste money and set up Tulisa. Would actually love to know why and with a clear understandable reason from them. Just ditching the Faker is not enough. Why?
The Sun's basically caused tax payers money to be wasted on this.
She should do a cover version of Grandmaster Flash and Melle Mel's seminal classic, 'White Lines'.
Tulisa understands that to mean something quite different!
No doubt , she's not the first 'celeb' to be caught in this way , I'd imagine the boxer herbie Hide is kicking himself for his guilty plea .
Ultimately greedy fame hungry celebs get sucked in and **** themselves for a chance 5 more mins in the spotlight. I don't have a massive amount of sympathy but Its tittle tattle so don't spin this public interest prosecution rubbish as it certainly doesn't fulfil the rules of evidence .
It's amazing when you think how many stories seem to be out there , over the years , to be exposed and we get this dross . Some showbiz stuff ok but at the top level and instead journalists take risks that lead to a judges comments like this for tullisa and a bag of bing bong , crazy .
So agree just Crazy. Hope the State and Tulisa can hit Suns pocket as they don't seem to understand anything else.
I think tullisa may find it hard given her 'complicity' in the events that unfolded , although clearly she's been massively played by the paper . I'd love her to have a successful civil action but who knows , the judges comments mean I'd expect to see the state become involved .
How can it go ahead when the person who provided the evidence has been found to be lieing a judge cannot ignore that as thats what the whole case is based upon, to continue would be unfair and a fishing trip.
This is precisely why the charge was "being concerned in the supply of" and not dealing.
According to her statement, she's said to have told Mahmood's driver that she disapproved of drugs and the driver apparently "changed his mind" after meeting Mahmood.
That's basically what the case was tossed on.
She's not been "cleared" or found not guilty, the case is tossed on a technicality. I wouldn't be surprised if this is why her co-defendant pleaded guilty last week because he was probably told that the case wouldn't go any further due to Mahmood's actions and any guilty plea would simply be struck from the records.
Ridiculous decision.
This exactly, it has been shown over the years that drug related stories doesn't do harm to careers. All you have to do is take a look at The Rolling Stones, Ozzy Osbourne, the late Amy Winehouse to see that negative publicity doesn't stop people from buying their material. It is the case of releasing sh!t material harms record sales.
Another one of those cases where those pesky judges know less about the law than DS posters , clearly the judge felt the prospect of a key witness lying somewhat undermined the prosecution case.
Regardless of that though I'm also deeply uncomfortable with " I can make you famous , I can make you so so rich & get you info the movies . Do you know anyone who can get me cocaine ?"... The judge said "he'd gone much further than any police sting could" , effectively he's suggested that tulisa was subject to entrapment . As I said in my earlier post I've no real sympathy with her but for me it's gossip rather than something that should find itself at a court . The man who supplied the actual drugs then fine but the facilitator it seems weak to me and it also seems the trial judge agreed .
!!!!!
It looks like the main prosecution witness might have:
Committed perjury
Attempted to influence a witness
Attempted to pervert the course of justice
This is simply not true.
Firstly, she has been cleared. That is a fact. That is what happens when a judge dismisses a case.
Secondly, it wasn't just a 'technicality'.
I don't claim to be a legal expert - never have done. And i'm not disputing the actual reasons for tossing the case at all - from a point of law, it shouldn't have continued.
She's on tape explaining the code for the "sweets" and telling Mahmood she can "sort him out", as well as ringing her co-defendant to ask him if he had the "sweets". The text messages between them are further testament to her claim to be able to "sort him out".
And the fact that Mahmood was then given the number of her co-defendant to enable him to do the actual deal all points to someone being quite willingly involved in the sequence of events - and most likely not for the first time either.
Fair enough. I'm happy to retract those claims then.