Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
«1

Comments

  • edited June 2014
    Surprised she has been found not guilty - OK, haven't heard all the evidence, but there did seem to be quite a bit about them disposing of stuff...

    Guess the buck doesn't always stop with the boss.
  • edited June 2014
    blah blah blah, libel blah!
  • The info she picked up from hacking the jurors phones was obviously put to better use than Coulson's.
  • Libel alert!
  • Unbelievable - been following this closely in Private Eye "The Trial of The Century".

    She's about as innocent as Linda Lovelace.
  • Surprised she has got away with it.

    or, you know, she's not guilty of committing any crimes.
  • Surprised she has got away with it.

    or, you know, she's not guilty of committing any crimes.
    Yeah, right! Guilty as sin but, as Weegie said, got away with it.

  • Surprised she has got away with it.

    or, you know, she's not guilty of committing any crimes.
    Edited...

  • Be very careful what you write folks.
  • How can we comment when we haven't heard all the evidence? Anyway WOULD YA?
  • Sponsored links:


  • dickplumb said:

    How can we comment when we haven't heard all the evidence? Anyway WOULD YA?

    Exactly the same way, that "we" say players are shite when we've never heard of them :-)
  • dickplumb said:

    How can we comment when we haven't heard all the evidence? Anyway WOULD YA?

    Exactly, only appropriate thread, a WouldYa.

    Enough conspiracy theories on CL with the football, let alone this.
  • This was so obviously going to happen. The defence knew that somebody had to carry the can, so it was all about making it Coulson and presenting her in the most flattering light.
    Brilliant piece of defending.
  • edited June 2014
    I don't quite understand how you can be found guilty of a conspiracy charge on your own? You have to have at least two people to make a conspiracy surely?

    Whatever it is highly embarrassing for David Cameron.
  • Were there not some text or email messages between David Cameron and his friend Rebecca Brooks famously signed off 'LOL', which Cameron took to mean lots of luck? Were not Rebecca Brooks and Andy Coulson sharing special moments together, and didn't Andy Coulson then work for David Cameron? Andy Coulson has now been found guilty of stuff.
    It now turns out that Andy Coulson was doing bad stuff, and of course without David Cameron having been involved in any way at any point. I mean Cameron said he asked Andy Coulson if he was a naughty boy and Andy said no, so Cameron decided to give him a 'second' chance. I wonder what the first chance was.

  • why embarrassing for Cameron.
    Did he ask him to do it?

  • I thought she was guilty for 2 reasons;
    If you've got that far with the CPS you must done something
    And being ginger.

    Harsh may be but trials would be a lot quicker if I was in charge.
  • MrOneLung said:

    why embarrassing for Cameron.
    Did he ask him to do it?

    Hired Andy Coulson afterwards.
  • Cameron said he was led to believe Coulson had done nothing wrong, but later said; "I gave a man a second chance and that was a mistake." But I figured, you don't give second chances to innocent people. Unless you know, really, that they f****d up.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Addickted said:

    Unbelievable - been following this closely in Private Eye "The Trial of The Century".

    She's about as innocent as Linda Lovelace.

    Linda was a very sweet young lady...
  • Addickted said:

    Unbelievable - been following this closely in Private Eye "The Trial of The Century".

    She's about as innocent as Linda Lovelace.

    In what way was Rebekah Brooks exploited and abused?
  • Bosses and workers, looks like a class based judgment, sick of this tbh...
  • Remember the legal test was 'beyond reasonable doubt' and not 'the balance of probabilities'. We do need to be careful what we say here .It seems that there was some key evidence which damned Coulson whereas from what I could determine the evidence against Brooks was more circumstantial.

    Just seen a TV report and I think it was his email to a colleague saying 'do his phone' which damned him. His visit to David Blunkett to discuss his affair also seems to have been seen to be significant.
  • Brooks to well connected.
  • Bosses and workers, looks like a class based judgment, sick of this tbh...

    Buddy - you are so spot-on.
    A sad day for Britain.
  • Sometimes people may be guilty but the evidence isn't there. With Coulson there was a telephone converstaion - aptly- that had him banged to rights. The fact he was guilty suggests possibly that other editors of that paper followed the same practices - but if they deny it and you don't have any proof you can't convict! Rightly so.
  • She is obviously not the fantastic top journalist she likes to think she is if she didn't know where half the stories she printed came from or did it not occur to her to ask how the journalists got the information.
  • I don't quite understand how you can be found guilty of a conspiracy charge on your own? You have to have at least two people to make a conspiracy surely?

    Whatever it is highly embarrassing for David Cameron.

    The conspiracy was with a bunch of journos who've already plead guilty IIRC
  • Scandalous that with the evidence he didn't plead guilty. Cost of trial enormous. Can he be chased for proceeds of crime as his bonuses would have been based on the papers phone taps sold?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!