kanny 20,724 Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-43419711 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DIDO.1 22,845 Posted March 16, 2018 Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 And Portman hunt acquitted day before 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sussex 5,777 Posted March 16, 2018 Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 Who withheld the photos ? , is it not illegal to withhold evidence ..hopefully those that did will be making an appearance to explain why ...... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Blackbriar 8,569 Posted March 16, 2018 Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 3 hours ago, sussex said: Who withheld the photos ? , is it not illegal to withhold evidence ..hopefully those that did will be making an appearance to explain why ...... I'm no lawyer, but that's "attempting to pervert the course of justice", surely ? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sussex 5,777 Posted March 16, 2018 Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Blackbriar said: I'm no lawyer, but that's "attempting to pervert the course of justice", surely ? Only if your not part of the “system “ ...anyone in the system , police, government etc gets a “ mistake “ card , we’re if things go tits up you produce your “ a mistake has occurred “ card and that allows you to bypass the bit we’re your arse gets dragged across burning coals , mere mortals would be doing a stretch at her Maggoties pleasure ..it’s a good system .....made better if you have the gold edged card .... 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DIDO.1 22,845 Posted March 16, 2018 Report Share Posted March 16, 2018 An anti hunting wildlife officer and a currupt 'expert' witness. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tatsblisters 10,270 Posted March 19, 2018 Report Share Posted March 19, 2018 Can some one send this link to our local rag the Rotherham Advertiser who have put up a readers poll asking if land owners should be allowed to let hunts on their land.https://l.(!64.56:886/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rotherhamadvertiser.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fview%2Cwentworth-landowners-blasted-for-allowing-hunt-with-dogs-to-use-their-land_25934.htm&h=ATMV2GDi6NGWNQ5ozuUO3zd4AypMRui0f4goBsMad9hQN5nq2XLyTnogL5U4qUVvd2YF3HMRHcLdkI6qG8VPj40NTDeZTCbGbDET9xPaYl0HhNeb5N6Vv_mAClQkziCQsJBNRg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisJones 7,975 Posted March 19, 2018 Report Share Posted March 19, 2018 On 3/16/2018 at 01:34, sussex said: Who withheld the photos ? , is it not illegal to withhold evidence ..hopefully those that did will be making an appearance to explain why ...... 2 On 3/16/2018 at 05:06, Blackbriar said: I'm no lawyer, but that's "attempting to pervert the course of justice", surely ? According to the article, the CPS is quoted "This decision was not taken due to disclosure issues." I am curious as to why it was overturned but we've discussed in other threads that when breaking the law intent has to be demonstrated. If an entire pack has had this overturned because intent couldn't be demonstrated it's very good news indeed for John Q Dogwalker! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
C556 351 Posted March 19, 2018 Report Share Posted March 19, 2018 It sounds similar to the recent rape trials that were in the news, where the police hadn't disclosed all the evidence that showed the alleged rapists were not guilty. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,809 Posted March 19, 2018 Report Share Posted March 19, 2018 If all that was needed was a few photos to show 'non-intent' then surely it would have been completely reasonable to have doubt in the absence of them? "Justice"............ LOL There is a hunting related case going to trial shortly which is equally as unbelievable based on the evidence to date. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisJones 7,975 Posted March 19, 2018 Report Share Posted March 19, 2018 26 minutes ago, Born Hunter said: If all that was needed was a few photos to show 'non-intent' then surely it would have been completely reasonable to have doubt in the absence of them? "Justice"............ LOL There is a hunting related case going to trial shortly which is equally as unbelievable based on the evidence to date. If I was conspiracy minded I'd be thinking that there are forces at work making these stupid convictions and then subsequently overturning them to make this stupid and unworkable law even more stupid and unworkable... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,809 Posted March 19, 2018 Report Share Posted March 19, 2018 18 minutes ago, ChrisJones said: If I was conspiracy minded I'd be thinking that there are forces at work making these stupid convictions and then subsequently overturning them to make this stupid and unworkable law even more stupid and unworkable... The Labour Party will fix that problem. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisJones 7,975 Posted March 19, 2018 Report Share Posted March 19, 2018 Just now, baker boy said: Every time a hunt is found not guilty on an illegal hunting charge the publicity just makes the antis and lefties more commited to getting the hunting act tightened up Luckily the public give less of a sh*t about now than before the ban was passed. All this is good, IMHO. We have an unworkable ambiguous law on the books that anyone convicted under will likely be overturned on appeal depending on the offence. How many people will accept a political party that will spend parliamentary time debating this with all the issues currently going on in Britain? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,809 Posted March 19, 2018 Report Share Posted March 19, 2018 Just now, ChrisJones said: Luckily the public give less of a sh*t about now than before the ban was passed. All this is good, IMHO. We have an unworkable ambiguous law on the books that anyone convicted under will likely be overturned on appeal depending on the offence. How many people will accept a political party that will spend parliamentary time debating this with all the issues currently going on in Britain? If your first statement was indicative to the answer to your question then I'd agree it is a good thing. Unfortunately I think the whole animal rights/anti hunting business is an easy sell to the modern Labour supporter (read anti Tory). They don't give toss really but equally nod in support. I honestly think it'd be an easy sell. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisJones 7,975 Posted March 19, 2018 Report Share Posted March 19, 2018 Just now, baker boy said: When has a Govt or a single issue pressure group ( in this case the LACS) ever given a shit whether joe public cares or not, THEY supposedly care and thats all that matters to them Agreed but I just don't think there is parliamentary will to tackle an existing law when you have every other problem from Brexit to road quality all in front of it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpeg.cc7f0feb08deb4ccbfbd2e27a4df3100.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.