Ramseyboi Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 1 hour ago, the stinking enigma said: It's a perception shift unridiculise ashie operation carried out by top level establishment stooge heading. How other people cannot see this is beyond me. That's why andy wint was off last week too, he was being briefed on how to run with it. I know most of this for a fact. Stone cold. Go away hey, Howard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 Actually MR is right and DA is wrong. DA is appearing in court on Headings claim. Just he’s appearing via an advocate. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 (edited) 9 minutes ago, John Wright said: Actually MR is right and DA is wrong. DA is appearing in court on Headings claim. Just he’s appearing via an advocate. That's what I thought, but wondered if a directions hearing was not classed as an appearance. Either way, he has obviously put the wind up MR, who are still, possibly, smarting after HQ had a tantrum. Edited October 25, 2021 by Gladys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, Gladys said: That's what I thought, but wondered if a directions hearing was not classed as an appearance. Either way, he has obviously put the wind up MR, who are still, possibly, smarting after HQ had a tantrum. Parties appear at hearings, whether for substantive or interlocutory matters, such as directions, but normally they appear via an advocate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 2 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said: I get that but either way it’s like being taken to court by Goofy or Mickey Mouse surely? It can’t really have any serious basis in law as an action hence, I assume, the need for a directions hearing to decide whether the great pile of toilet paper that has been compiled by some barmpot anti-vax sympathizer lawyer has any basis for anything surely? Yes, but we don't know the grounds of the case. It is likely it is barmpot, whether compiled by a sympathetic lawyer or not, but we don't know. I am tempted to go but it may be rammed with press and sympathetic crackpots, so probably won't bother. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 8 minutes ago, John Wright said: Parties appear at hearings, whether for substantive or interlocutory matters, such as directions, but normally they appear via an advocate. Thanks John, I had assumed he had taken advice (probably from the AG) before posting his "correction" but had overlooked his superhuman ability to be expert on everything he encounters. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 I hope it doesn't get dismissed out of hand and that Headcase and that oddball lawyer can actually legally make some kind of a case, if it applies the sort of logic as in that ridiculous letter they sent to HE it'll be hilarious. Ashford on the stand defending himself from allegations so fucking stupid that he has absolutely no idea how to answer. It'd be a scream. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 Just now, TheTeapot said: I hope it doesn't get dismissed out of hand and that Headcase and that oddball lawyer can actually legally make some kind of a case, if it applies the sort of logic as in that ridiculous letter they sent to HE it'll be hilarious. Ashford on the stand defending himself from allegations so fucking stupid that he has absolutely no idea how to answer. It'd be a scream. Is that lawyer involved do you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 1 minute ago, TheTeapot said: I hope it doesn't get dismissed out of hand and that Headcase and that oddball lawyer can actually legally make some kind of a case, if it applies the sort of logic as in that ridiculous letter they sent to HE it'll be hilarious. Ashford on the stand defending himself from allegations so fucking stupid that he has absolutely no idea how to answer. It'd be a scream. Ashford not knowing what the actual answer is has never stopped him before. Between the two of them, the weight of pseudoscience will probably create a black hole and swallow them both. 1 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 1 minute ago, offshoremanxman said: It will be the exact same as this would be my guess https://www.stratford-herald.com/news/anti-vaxxer-tries-to-get-vaccine-minister-nadhim-zahawi-arre-9204968/ Except that was an attempt to get that Minister arrested rather than what seems to be a civil case against Davy Boy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 1 hour ago, offshoremanxman said: It was an accusation of misconduct in public office which according to MR is the same wording being used against Ashford. Suddenly I have an interest in jury duty 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted October 25, 2021 Share Posted October 25, 2021 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevster Posted October 26, 2021 Share Posted October 26, 2021 If, or rather when, it gets thrown out, Mr Headcase will then claim government cover-up 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danoo Posted October 26, 2021 Share Posted October 26, 2021 Let’s hope Ashford has to take the stand around Halloween time, all dressed up in black. Just for dramatic effect. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted October 26, 2021 Share Posted October 26, 2021 19 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: Here you are: It's a Directions hearing, so I'm not sure that Minister Ashford will actually need to turn up (or that anyone will except the lawyers). It may be no more than Corlett saying "WTAF" and throwing it out. On the other hand maybe Heading has got evidence of some evil doings, rather than just demanding that everyone else should live in his fantasy world because he's a very, very special boy. Any indication as to who is representing Heading? Or is he representing himself? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.