DS Forums

 
 

EE: Would Mick Get Done For Perverting Justice If He Admits He Took Rap For Ian?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 16-08-2014, 15:51
Styker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 28,304

?????

I think this is a bit of a tough one as the Police arrested Mick and didn't believe him when he first told them the truth and they chose to believe Rainie instead. If he did admit he took the rap for Ian, would he get done for perverting the course of justice do you think or perjury even and isn't his own licence to run a pub at stake too for committing a criminal offence?
Styker is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 16-08-2014, 16:05
J-B
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Winter is coming.
Posts: 13,324
With any luck. A vicious criminal that preys on innocent crackhead women then perverts the course of justice unashamedly.
J-B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-08-2014, 17:49
Steve_Whelan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,849
But he didn't take the rap Ian for he got caught talking to a known prostitute presumably an area known for curb crawlers and the police didn't believe him. If the police had of turned up a couple of minuets earlier Ian would have been caught.
Steve_Whelan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-08-2014, 18:07
Kim_x
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,444
But he didn't take the rap Ian for he got caught talking to a known prostitute presumably an area known for curb crawlers and the police didn't believe him. If the police had of turned up a couple of minuets earlier Ian would have been caught.
Yes, but Mick subsequently entered a guilty plea in court. That was where it potentially became perverting the course of justice.
Kim_x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-08-2014, 20:17
Daisy_Duke
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 962
This whole storyline is annoying me no end. Mick wasn't even kerb crawling, so why did he plead guilty?
Daisy_Duke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-08-2014, 20:32
Lizzie Brookes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,318
This whole storyline is annoying me no end. Mick wasn't even kerb crawling, so why did he plead guilty?
He pleaded guilty because his solicitor said it was the best way to make the whole thing go away - otherwise it would be Raine's word against his and a lot of time being wasted while police looked for evidence, put him on trial etc.

By the way, why is it even illegal? It's not like stealing, assault, murder etc. It's okay for Ian to pay Rainie to sleep with him but not okay for Mick to park his car and have a prostitute go up to him and proposition him (which we know he refused anyway) and though prostitution is a horrible business, if all the men got imprisoned, how would the women get their money?
Lizzie Brookes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-08-2014, 20:35
Mel94
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Coventry, Warwickshire
Posts: 4,930
Probably not considering he was advised by his solicitor to just plead guilty and pay the fine.
Mel94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-08-2014, 21:37
Daisy_Duke
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 962
He pleaded guilty because his solicitor said it was the best way to make the whole thing go away - otherwise it would be Raine's word against his and a lot of time being wasted while police looked for evidence, put him on trial etc.

By the way, why is it even illegal? It's not like stealing, assault, murder etc. It's okay for Ian to pay Rainie to sleep with him but not okay for Mick to park his car and have a prostitute go up to him and proposition him (which we know he refused anyway) and though prostitution is a horrible business, if all the men got imprisoned, how would the women get their money?
Nothing, but *nothing* would make me admit to something I didn't do.

As for the other stuff, I can't answer. Mick did nothing wrong and it's really irritating me
Daisy_Duke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-08-2014, 14:37
Styker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 28,304
Probably not considering he was advised by his solicitor to just plead guilty and pay the fine.
I think he could well get done for perjury which is legal definition for lying in court I believe. I'm amazed Mick hasn't mentioned this to Linda yet or that his own license to be a pub landlord isn't up for review as a result of him pleading guilty to a criminal offence.
Styker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-08-2014, 15:00
Absolute Rotter
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 713
You've morphed into mo mouse

I doubt he would be unless of course Ian turns out to be the murderer.
Finally someone cottons on. Just look at his posting history. He does it all the time. Some might call it baiting. However Im the villain for pointing it out usually.
Absolute Rotter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-08-2014, 15:33
trevor tiger
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 22,735
This whole storyline is annoying me no end. Mick wasn't even kerb crawling, so why did he plead guilty?
Me too. It is truly ridiculous.

I think he could well get done for perjury which is legal definition for lying in court I believe. I'm amazed Mick hasn't mentioned this to Linda yet or that his own license to be a pub landlord isn't up for review as a result of him pleading guilty to a criminal offence.
Exactly but Mick the loving family man would rather loose his livelihood and humiliate and embarrass his wife and children than talk to his friend Ian who he only actually met quite recently, into doing the right thing.

He should get done for perverting the course of justice but because Lucy's murder investigation is being hampered because of his preposterous lie. The police know Ian is lying but not what about and Mick is allowing this to continue.
trevor tiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-08-2014, 15:47
Scrabbler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 31,192
In my view the police didn't have a case and Mick was stupid to plead guilty. They obviously did not hear the actual conversation and Rainie didn't even get in Micks car. Sure Rainie was a known prostitute, but for all they know Mick was asking for directions. He did not have any previous convictions so it would have been Micks word against Rainies. I cannot understand why she told the police he was one of her regulars, it was stupid. If one of her punters got arrested it could put off other punters surely? Would have been much better for her if she had just lied a and said he was asking for directions.
Scrabbler is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 17-08-2014, 16:15
Styker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 28,304
Me too. It is truly ridiculous.



Exactly but Mick the loving family man would rather loose his livelihood and humiliate and embarrass his wife and children than talk to his friend Ian who he only actually met quite recently, into doing the right thing.

He should get done for perverting the course of justice but because Lucy's murder investigation is being hampered because of his preposterous lie. The police know Ian is lying but not what about and Mick is allowing this to continue.
In my view the police didn't have a case and Mick was stupid to plead guilty. They obviously did not hear the actual conversation and Rainie didn't even get in Micks car. Sure Rainie was a known prostitute, but for all they know Mick was asking for directions. He did not have any previous convictions so it would have been Micks word against Rainies. I cannot understand why she told the police he was one of her regulars, it was stupid. If one of her punters got arrested it could put off other punters surely? Would have been much better for her if she had just lied a and said he was asking for directions.
RE BIB, He called her a brass or something and spoke dismissively about her. She's a vindictive so and so too so I wasn't surprised she lied about him.

Maybe if/when Mick does own up he could try and claim the defence of duress? Out of a fear/concern about Ian/Lucy? In any case its not really in the public interest to go after Mick anymore though his conviction would probably stay unless he wants to risk getting done for perjury instead but they should go after Ian and that uber wally Ian wasn't kerb crawling on that occasion either, he was giving into blackmail! If they are going to go after anyone it should be that waster Rainie!
Styker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-08-2014, 18:30
priscilla
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: God didn't do this, devil did
Posts: 28,118
I hope so, he can take his saintly ways to prison I don't want to see them on my screen.
priscilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-08-2014, 23:53
dd68
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Posts: 16,810
It's made Mick 'too' nice, don't like it
dd68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2014, 00:26
Styker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 28,304
I hope so, he can take his saintly ways to prison I don't want to see them on my screen.
So you don't like his reasoning? That surprises me about you as I remember you feeling sorry for Michael Moon a lot and if anyone didn't deserve that much sympathy, it was him.
Styker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2014, 11:08
Mormon Girl
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 9,447
I hope so, he can take his saintly ways to prison I don't want to see them on my screen.
How long should he go to prison for? Do you think Danny Dyer is a good actor?
Mormon Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2014, 11:23
los.kav
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 7,824
A lot of people plead guilty to these types of offenses because they're small offenses, you don't normally get jail time for them, they're told to by solicitors, and it's the fastest way to get it to go away. Even if he's found to be innocent, the only thing the court can do is expunge his record.

My question is: can the police retroactively arrest Ian for the same offence? I know they can arrest who they like if they find a prostitute and her client in the act or just before the act, but can/would they arrest someone who comes forward voluntarily for being with a prostitute several months ago?
los.kav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2014, 11:38
Steve_Whelan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,849
A lot of people plead guilty to these types of offenses because they're small offenses, you don't normally get jail time for them, they're told to by solicitors, and it's the fastest way to get it to go away. Even if he's found to be innocent, the only thing the court can do is expunge his record.

My question is: can the police retroactively arrest Ian for the same offence? I know they can arrest who they like if they find a prostitute and her client in the act or just before the act, but can/would they arrest someone who comes forward voluntarily for being with a prostitute several months ago?
prostitution in itself is not illegal, so no ian could not be arrested retrospectively. soliciting is illegal but to be prosecuted you have to be caught in the act.
Steve_Whelan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2014, 11:42
los.kav
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 7,824
prostitution in itself is not illegal, so no ian could not be arrested retrospectively. soliciting is illegal but to be prosecuted you have to be caught in the act.
Interesting. Thanks.
los.kav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2014, 16:57
mo mouse
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,152
These antics of Mick should be nipped in the bud now. Right now. He should be locked up for 2-3 years to give him time to reflect on what he's done. I know the sex with Rainie was probably mind blowing, feverish, passionate and steamy and all that but was it worth it in the end ? If he must visit prostitutes in the future, and I'm not one to sit in judgement on him, he should make sure he doesn't get caught.
mo mouse is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2014, 17:10
olivej
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14,621
These antics of Mick should be nipped in the bud now. Right now. He should be locked up for 2-3 years to give him time to reflect on what he's done. I know the sex with Rainie was probably mind blowing, feverish, passionate and steamy and all that but was it worth it in the end ? If he must visit prostitutes in the future, and I'm not one to sit in judgement on him, he should make sure he doesn't get caught.
do you mean Ian

Mick hasnt actually had sex with Rainie
olivej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2014, 17:16
mo mouse
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,152
do you mean Ian

Mick hasnt actually had sex with Rainie
No I meant Mick. I assume they wouldn't show it on screen before the watershed.
mo mouse is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2014, 17:27
olivej
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14,621
No I meant Mick. I assume they wouldn't show it on screen before the watershed.
ok

Im confused, lol, but thats nothing new
olivej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-08-2014, 10:25
Styker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 28,304
A lot of people plead guilty to these types of offenses because they're small offenses, you don't normally get jail time for them, they're told to by solicitors, and it's the fastest way to get it to go away. Even if he's found to be innocent, the only thing the court can do is expunge his record.

My question is: can the police retroactively arrest Ian for the same offence? I know they can arrest who they like if they find a prostitute and her client in the act or just before the act, but can/would they arrest someone who comes forward voluntarily for being with a prostitute several months ago?
Getting a criminal record of any kind will close many doors for people and I would not recommend accepting taking a conviction lightly. The right to travel to America can be closed off when people get convicted and anyone with a conviction will definetely have to apply for a visa to travel to America even if the conviction is spent.
Styker is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:31.