Apparently she is now in trouble for filming inside the court building
Seems to keep doing things to make her situation worse. Not her fault of course, it's her mental health that made her send the nasty message and everything else she does wrong. I said on another thread a while back, people with use mental health ans the reason behind everything. And undermine those with genuine mental health issues.
I think the timing of the latest update on her feet (which not unsurprisingly seem not to be nearly as bad as she said they were when it suits), was before the court case to try to influence the outcome and maybe even get out of community service.
Thrives on attention and drama - the more drama, the more attention. A bit more (some) focus on paying people back would be good - not sure how she funds her lifestyle as bankrupt. Such a bad example
Apparently she is now in trouble for filming inside the court building
Probably a new show Channel 4 have commissioned - who’d have thought it, Dorries was right, we can’t have that sort of content from a public broadcaster
Apparently she is now in trouble for filming inside the court building
Probably a new show Channel 4 have commissioned - who’d have thought it, Dorries was right, we can’t have that sort of content from a public broadcaster
It was her filming on her mobile phone, totally illegal within a court building, but apparently the powers that be have decided not to pursue it
Apparently she is now in trouble for filming inside the court building
Probably a new show Channel 4 have commissioned - who’d have thought it, Dorries was right, we can’t have that sort of content from a public broadcaster
It was her filming on her mobile phone, totally illegal within a court building, but apparently the powers that be have decided not to pursue it
Apparently she is now in trouble for filming inside the court building
Probably a new show Channel 4 have commissioned - who’d have thought it, Dorries was right, we can’t have that sort of content from a public broadcaster
It was her filming on her mobile phone, totally illegal within a court building, but apparently the powers that be have decided not to pursue it
Due in court tomorrow for speeding and not providing the police with details who was driving at the time of the offence. This was 11days before she rolled the BMW whilst drunk and banned from driving.
Due in court tomorrow for speeding and not providing the police with details who was driving at the time of the offence. This was 11days before she rolled the BMW whilst drunk and banned from driving.
As she was banned at the time, surely she should have to prove (beyond doubt) that it wasn't her driving. How can she get away with failing to name who was?
This will be her get out. Refuse to name the driver and the only charge will be failure to disclose. Just a fine.
Failing to provide drivers identity carries 6 penalty points on your licence and up to £1000 fine. Not sure how a judge would see that in the circumstances of her already being banned however.
I wasn't aware that penalty points can be applied unless it can be proved, conclusively, that you were the driver. Brother in law had his car written off by a woman delivery driver, in own car probably not insured for business useage, t boning him at lights, and refused to say who was driving. He wasn't aware that the case was in Court as could have identified her as the driver. Met police weren't interested in pursuing it.
I wasn't aware that penalty points can be applied unless it can be proved, conclusively, that you were the driver. Brother in law had his car written off by a woman delivery driver, in own car probably not insured for business useage, t boning him at lights, and refused to say who was driving. He wasn't aware that the case was in Court as could have identified her as the driver. Met police weren't interested in pursuing it.
What a shame, especially in the circumstances. Surely every/anyone could refuse to name the driver in a case which would defeat the purpose?
A simple solution would be to permanently ban her from driving. Hopefully she would sell any car she owns.
I know the law can't just be made up as it goes along, but if she gets banned...it will probably save someone's life.
Driving a car is not a right....it is a privilege. She has more than enough money to find a way around not having to drive.
Agreed. And from social media too. And from taking holidays whilst she stills owes people. Oh and from plastic surgery and many other things whilst she still owes. And from tv too.
Due in court tomorrow for speeding and not providing the police with details who was driving at the time of the offence. This was 11days before she rolled the BMW whilst drunk and banned from driving.
As she was banned at the time, surely she should have to prove (beyond doubt) that it wasn't her driving. How can she get away with failing to name who was?
Is that how it works? I assumed the prosecution would have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she was driving?
Comments
I think the timing of the latest update on her feet (which not unsurprisingly seem not to be nearly as bad as she said they were when it suits), was before the court case to try to influence the outcome and maybe even get out of community service.
Thrives on attention and drama - the more drama, the more attention. A bit more (some) focus on paying people back would be good - not sure how she funds her lifestyle as bankrupt. Such a bad example
She shouldn't be in our media spotlight.
She purposely took her son Harvey to a nightclub to make a couple of grand via a guest appearance.
I know the law can't just be made up as it goes along, but if she gets banned...it will probably save someone's life.
Driving a car is not a right....it is a privilege. She has more than enough money to find a way around not having to drive.
She is such a bad example and seems to get away with living a luxury, if not chaotic lifestyle whilst bankrupt