Originally Posted by olivej:
“ok
Im confused, lol, but thats nothing new
”
“ok
Im confused, lol, but thats nothing new
”
Don't take anything on this forum literally
Mo is just being his usual self. Mick didn't sleep with Rainie.
EE: Would Mick Get Done For Perverting Justice If He Admits He Took Rap For Ian?
2 of 2
Don't take anything on this forum literally
Mo is just being his usual self. Mick didn't sleep with Rainie.
Originally Posted by Styker:
“I think he could well get done for perjury which is legal definition for lying in court I believe.”
“I think he could well get done for perjury which is legal definition for lying in court I believe.”
You're way off mark with that. Mick didn't lie in court, he wasn't under oath and in any case he has NOT committed perjury or perverted the course of justice in any way.
Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts:
“You're way off mark with that. Mick didn't lie in court, he wasn't under oath and in any case he has NOT committed perjury or perverted the course of justice in any way.”
“You're way off mark with that. Mick didn't lie in court, he wasn't under oath and in any case he has NOT committed perjury or perverted the course of justice in any way.”
Errr he pleaded guilty to something he wasn't guilty of. Idf that isn't perjury/perversion then what is?
Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts:
“You're way off mark with that. Mick didn't lie in court, he wasn't under oath and in any case he has NOT committed perjury or perverted the course of justice in any way.”
“You're way off mark with that. Mick didn't lie in court, he wasn't under oath and in any case he has NOT committed perjury or perverted the course of justice in any way.”
Originally Posted by Styker:
“Errr he pleaded guilty to something he wasn't guilty of. Idf that isn't perjury/perversion then what is?”
“Errr he pleaded guilty to something he wasn't guilty of. Idf that isn't perjury/perversion then what is?”
The charge was put to him by the Clerk of the Court and he was asked "Do you plead guilty or not guilty", to which he replied "Guilty".
He never lied and wasn't under oath, so no offence.
Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts:
“The charge was put to him by the Clerk of the Court and he was asked "Do you plead guilty or not guilty", to which he replied "Guilty".
He never lied and wasn't under oath, so no offence.”
“The charge was put to him by the Clerk of the Court and he was asked "Do you plead guilty or not guilty", to which he replied "Guilty".
He never lied and wasn't under oath, so no offence.”
He took the rap for Ian, he wasn't guilty himself so I think he is guilty of both offences. Its one thing to hold the view that its up to the authorites to prove one's guilt but if one accepts the blame for something they didn't do in order to let someone else off the hook, then I doubt very much that is legal.
Originally Posted by Styker:
“He took the rap for Ian, he wasn't guilty himself so I think he is guilty of both offences. Its one thing to hold the view that its up to the authorites to prove one's guilt but if one accepts the blame for something they didn't do in order to let someone else off the hook, then I doubt very much that is legal.”
“He took the rap for Ian, he wasn't guilty himself so I think he is guilty of both offences. Its one thing to hold the view that its up to the authorites to prove one's guilt but if one accepts the blame for something they didn't do in order to let someone else off the hook, then I doubt very much that is legal.”
No oath, no perjury
Originally Posted by Styker:
“He took the rap for Ian, he wasn't guilty himself so I think he is guilty of both offences. Its one thing to hold the view that its up to the authorites to prove one's guilt but if one accepts the blame for something they didn't do in order to let someone else off the hook, then I doubt very much that is legal.”
“He took the rap for Ian, he wasn't guilty himself so I think he is guilty of both offences. Its one thing to hold the view that its up to the authorites to prove one's guilt but if one accepts the blame for something they didn't do in order to let someone else off the hook, then I doubt very much that is legal.”
From your replies it's pretty obvious that you don't have any legal training, and are just putting down what you think might happen.
In court he never 'took the rap for Ian', it was a separate alleged offence to anything that Ian may have done. He never lied either, as previously explained.
Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts:
“From your replies it's pretty obvious that you don't have any legal training, and are just putting down what you think might happen.
In court he never 'took the rap for Ian', it was a separate alleged offence to anything that Ian may have done. He never lied either, as previously explained.”
“From your replies it's pretty obvious that you don't have any legal training, and are just putting down what you think might happen.
In court he never 'took the rap for Ian', it was a separate alleged offence to anything that Ian may have done. He never lied either, as previously explained.”
I have studied some law but there are thousands of laws out there. Have you had legal training?
I think if the Carters try and profess his innocence to Cora and the rest of the Square without telling on/about idiot Ian then Cora could well bring up why did he admit to the offence in court then and that there could well be a law that Mick has fallen foul of.
Originally Posted by Styker:
“I have studied some law but there are thousands of laws out there. Have you had legal training?
I think if the Carters try and profess his innocence to Cora and the rest of the Square without telling on/about idiot Ian then Cora could well bring up why did he admit to the offence in court then and that there could well be a law that Mick has fallen foul of.”
“I have studied some law but there are thousands of laws out there. Have you had legal training?
I think if the Carters try and profess his innocence to Cora and the rest of the Square without telling on/about idiot Ian then Cora could well bring up why did he admit to the offence in court then and that there could well be a law that Mick has fallen foul of.”
Yes, I have been trained in Law, with 30 years experience. I had a case at Crown Court last Friday.
Nothing more would be happening to Mick if this were real, the case is over & done with and he certainly couldn't appeal.
In all honesty though, none of this story line has been particularly realistic. Go to any central London Magistrates Court such as Westminster in Marylebone Rd, and you'll see Toms like Raine getting sentenced to 1 day in jail which is usually deemed as 'served' after being held in custody overnight before their case.
Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts:
“Yes, I have been trained in Law, with 30 years experience. I had a case at Crown Court last Friday.
Nothing more would be happening to Mick if this were real, the case is over & done with and he certainly couldn't appeal.
In all honesty though, none of this story line has been particularly realistic. Go to any central London Magistrates Court such as Westminster in Marylebone Rd, and you'll see Toms like Raine getting sentenced to 1 day in jail which is usually deemed as 'served' after being held in custody overnight before their case.”
“Yes, I have been trained in Law, with 30 years experience. I had a case at Crown Court last Friday.
Nothing more would be happening to Mick if this were real, the case is over & done with and he certainly couldn't appeal.
In all honesty though, none of this story line has been particularly realistic. Go to any central London Magistrates Court such as Westminster in Marylebone Rd, and you'll see Toms like Raine getting sentenced to 1 day in jail which is usually deemed as 'served' after being held in custody overnight before their case.”
Ok. I think he was stupid to have pleaded guilty to something he didn't do though. On another aspect though, wouldn't someone in his position be expected to declare the conviction to the local council and his own licence to run a pub be on the line?
Originally Posted by Styker:
“Ok. I think he was stupid to have pleaded guilty to something he didn't do though. On another aspect though, wouldn't someone in his position be expected to declare the conviction to the local council and his own licence to run a pub be on the line?”
“Ok. I think he was stupid to have pleaded guilty to something he didn't do though. On another aspect though, wouldn't someone in his position be expected to declare the conviction to the local council and his own licence to run a pub be on the line?”
Yes, I agree it was stupid to plead guilty to something he didn't do and surely that *is* lying - to say one did something when one actually didn't?
And yes, I do believe he'd have to declare his conviction to the local council and his whole livelihood and that of his family would be on the line.
Originally Posted by Daisy_Duke:
“Yes, I agree it was stupid to plead guilty to something he didn't do and surely that *is* lying - to say one did something when one actually didn't?
And yes, I do believe he'd have to declare his conviction to the local council and his whole livelihood and that of his family would be on the line.”
“Yes, I agree it was stupid to plead guilty to something he didn't do and surely that *is* lying - to say one did something when one actually didn't?
And yes, I do believe he'd have to declare his conviction to the local council and his whole livelihood and that of his family would be on the line.”
Good job he added "And Shirley Carter" to the licence or did he officially?
Originally Posted by Daisy_Duke:
“Yes, I agree it was stupid to plead guilty to something he didn't do and surely that *is* lying - to say one did something when one actually didn't?
And yes, I do believe he'd have to declare his conviction to the local council and his whole livelihood and that of his family would be on the line.”
“Yes, I agree it was stupid to plead guilty to something he didn't do and surely that *is* lying - to say one did something when one actually didn't?
And yes, I do believe he'd have to declare his conviction to the local council and his whole livelihood and that of his family would be on the line.”
Dress it up as many ways as you like, he still didn't commit perjury or pervert the course of justice. He didn't even lie in court, as I have said before, he just pleaded guilty.
Originally Posted by Daisy_Duke:
“So pleading guilty when you're not actually guilty doesn't count as lying?”
“So pleading guilty when you're not actually guilty doesn't count as lying?”
As it wasn't under oath it doesn't count as perjury.
Originally Posted by Daisy_Duke:
“So pleading guilty when you're not actually guilty doesn't count as lying?”
“So pleading guilty when you're not actually guilty doesn't count as lying?”
How could it be lying - in court you are asked 'How do you plead, guilty or not guilty?'
Originally Posted by Daisy_Duke:
“Nah. I'm not buying it.”
“Nah. I'm not buying it.”
Why? Do you have legal training and experience in how the courts work, or is this just how you THINK it might pan out?
Why don't you explain how the law works, and perhaps give us examples of a couple of stated cases.
Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts:
“Why? Do you have legal training and experience in how the courts work, or is this just how you THINK it might pan out?
Why don't you explain how the law works, and perhaps give us examples of a couple of stated cases.”
“Why? Do you have legal training and experience in how the courts work, or is this just how you THINK it might pan out?
Why don't you explain how the law works, and perhaps give us examples of a couple of stated cases.”
Really?! Blimey!
I thought you were the legal expert!
No. I won't do all of that because I don't really care that much, but I still cannot see how saying one is guilty in court (or anywhere else) when one isn't guilty doesn't constitute as lying.
And that's that.
2 of 2
