Jeremy Clarkson And Tynwald

[keyboarder]

It's not funny!, I was eating mutton for a month!

 

After reading the superhero thread, are you sure you weren't eating some large piles of seaweed?

[homarus]

[Scribe]

Without wanting to lose impartiality, this gave me a giggle

[sarahc]

Right, that does it. I was wavering on the issue but anyone who punches Piers Morgan even once, never mind "several times in the head" can have whatever he wants.

[Tugger]

However, the numerous changes to the PO's legal team suggest that he may be batting on a rather sticky wicket.

 

I disagree. If PROWL have a case the courts are there to hear it. But first PROWL needs to issue proceedings. I wonder why they seem reluctant to do so...

[%age]

It is not simply a case of Clarkson -v- PROWL. It is Clarkson -v- (potentially) Everybody on the Isle of Man.

 

So, if Jez won a case against PROWL's particular arguments, that is not to say that PROWLS failure in court stands for every conceivable person and their own particular case.

 

In such a scenario, why should PROWL's failure to keep the right of way open (if JC should win in Court) effect the rights of, say, maybe a little old lady in Ronague who has walked the path every week all her life, or whatever. Also, in legal terms, there is the rights of future generations ('the unborn child') to consider.

 

If it was that simple, people would take on pseudo-PROWL types, just to "confirm" a legal status (although that sort of trick does happen on the Isle of Man in these sort of circumstances.

[Gladys]

But it is not Clarkson v PROWL, it is PROWL v Clarkson, except they will not pay for a proper judicial review.

[wideload]

isn't this whole thing based on UK right of way laws which have no standing over here?

[Grumble]

It is not simply a case of Clarkson -v- PROWL. It is Clarkson -v- (potentially) Everybody on the Isle of Man.

 

Speak for yourself.

 

There are plenty of us who would have no truck at all with a bunch of troublemakers who want to walk over someone's private property on the basis that they've not been told to cease and desist in the past, and take umbrage because the new owner of the land has asserted the basic human right to enjoy the fruits of his labour in peace.

 

And it's not because of who he is (although I agree that he's a great ambassador for the Island), I'd feel the same if it was Ethel Scrote or Piers Bloody Morgan.

[%age]

Yes, yes, I know quite how you feel about all this, but the word 'potentially' was in brackets there for a purpose. We are, after all, trying to put a serious legal aspect to all this rather than just man-in-pub-who-can-sort-the-world-out type of solution.

 

IThe basic human rights to enjoy the fruits of your labour in peace don't extend to buying a piece of land with a (possible) age old Public Right of Way through it and then telling the natives of your new country to naff off out of it. Surely Grumble, you don't extend your declared right wing views to that sort of thing do you?

[Skeddan]

There are plenty of us who would have no truck at all with a bunch of troublemakers who want to walk over someone's private property on the basis that they've not been told to cease and desist in the past, and take umbrage because the new owner of the land has asserted the basic human right to enjoy the fruits of his labour in peace.

That's all reasonable enough. Troublemakers harassing people in their homes and having their dogs worrying and killing sheep - not acceptable. Perfectly reasonable not to want them on his land - right of way or not - and to try to exclude them. Enjoying the fruits of his labour - yes, quite right he should have that right.

 

But none of that is in dispute here. The issue is about right of access for non-troublemakers who are responsible and well-behaved and don't harass him or interfere with his rights. (And if he bought land with a right of way on it, then he'd still be fully enjoying the fruits of his labour with public access - just without the extra topping of being able to get more than he's entitled to). If the troublemakers could be excluded, would everyone else be able to carry on having access and would the whole issue go away? If not, then I guess it becomes a legal issue.

 

I agree with %age - there is a lot more at stake in all this.

[Scribe]

Also I have yet to see a similar public outcry at the fact that the coastal walk from Port Soderick to the Firing range at Bainahowe has been closed to the public, as a result access has been lost to a couple of select fishing and climbing spots as well as the coastal walk itself,

 

 

Agree with you about the coastal path from Pt Soderick, that's been gone for years, hasn't it? Here's another for you, Douglas RC entrance nr Braddan Bridge to Tromode Road, used to be a signposted public footpath, I checked with Highways yesterday and they say it's not on the definitive map, so when and how did it stop being public?

 

Yes this is about more than Clarkson, is there something wrong with our Rights of Way law? If somehow established paths have lost their status then there should be a mechanism for restoring them, and if new R/Ws are needed there should be a means of creating them. over to you, Mr AG?

[Tugger]

The Langness walk is perfectly enjoyable without walking past Clarkson's kitchen. It really is difficult to see what PROWL's point is. And again, if they thought there WAS a right of way, then they could make their representations in court. When other people's actions infringe on your legal rights, you sue them. That goes for the old lady in Ronague as well

[Shit3hawk]

unless of course you are Mr C which would explain your take on the whole thing

What are you on about? this just shows how narrow minded you actually are , there are other ways to see the wildlife around Dreswick point other than walking. For your information not only have I walked around most of the Islands coastline including Langness I have also kayaked and sailed round the Island for years and intend to do so for many more,

 

I cant remember the last time/year I did try to walk that path at port Soderick but remember on walking up the concrete road I found that access the 'style' had been blocked by the hedgerow that had not been cleared ,not to be put off my afternoon stroll I decided to walk further up the road and cut across the field at the nearest gate, just as I was about to leave the field and continue on the headland path a land rover came bumbling across the field with his horn beeping, so I stopped and waited for them to catch up to me, the occupant was the estate manager and he told me that the path was now closed to the public ,I did get in touch with the DOT when I found out that the walk south of port Soderick had been diverted along the main road only to be told that the path had not been walked/used for X amount of years, but when I pointed out that the path was usually cleared once a year by dot workers , from what I can remember back then is, that if a landowner can prove that the right of way has not been used for so many years it can be removed from a list of active RoW's but is added to a list of minor RoW's ,then if its not used in 3 years it can be removed from that list and permanently closed to public , the problem is once it is on the secondary list the Dot no longer 'tend' to these paths , since no one compained the the paths needed maintainance the DoT removed the path from the list after the alloted time.

[Vix]

At the end of the day Jeremy Clarkson has purchased the lighthouse and surrounding land and if he doesnt want nosy dog-walker types gauping at him in his house then fair enough.

 

He was also quite right to put up the fences where they are as some of his sheep were killed by a dog. Also abuse has been hurled at his kids by people walking their dogs.

 

Me and my boyfriend walk his dog all the time down at langness and the changes made by JC have made no impact on us walking the dog or enjoying the scenery.

 

The action group PROWL seem to be a group of busy-body, curtain twitching over 60's who have nothing better to do than to cause a fuss about something really rather trivial.

 

Jeremy Clarkson chooses to bring topgear to film here pretty much every year and that gives the island good publicity and his wife is manx.

 

In my opnion PROWL need to get a grip and go find a cause worth putting their energy into.