Rita_Poon
Player Valuation: £90m
your pm, partying whilst your monarch was on her lonesome at her husbands funeral.lets see you "piece of cake" your way out of this one...
In your own time, mr decency and respect and civility....
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
your pm, partying whilst your monarch was on her lonesome at her husbands funeral.lets see you "piece of cake" your way out of this one...
your pm, partying whilst your monarch was on her lonesome at her husbands funeral.
In your own time, mr decency and respect and civility....
saville
phil green
cyril smith
fred goodwin
No no no, it's an honour a lady has received we'll go after. Doesn't sit right.
Technically the crown?Starmer defo has a question to face on this.
Six cases of conviction were referred to the CPS while he was DPP and only one was overturned. He was the ultimate sign off in allowing those 5 innocent people to go to prison.
The CPS had the right to intervene in these private convictions if they wanted to.Technically the crown?
the Crown Prosecution Service act on behalf of the crown, the clue's in the name.The CPS had the right to intervene in these private convictions if they wanted to.
It looks like case were referred to them and they agreed in all but one case to affirm a conviction.
The buck stops with the leader of the CPS.
I'm no fan of Starmer but the CPS don't decide the outcome of legal cases, they decide whether a prosecution is in the public interest etc. To be honest, the claim that someone is robbing the Post Office blind is unlikely to be overlooked. A serious enough claim to ask the courts to decide rather than leave it to some senior legal official in the CPS. The fact that the courts got it so wrong is the big deal ...the Crown Prosecution Service act on behalf of the crown, the clue's in the name.
They have the right to intervene if and when informed; if you know the legal process, mostly the Post Office prosecuted and informed later.The CPS had the right to intervene in these private convictions if they wanted to.
It looks like case were referred to them and they agreed in all but one case to affirm a conviction.
The buck stops with the leader of the CPS.
It was one of THE major cases of the day. I doubt very much that they needed to be informed about these cases. Hundreds were being pursued by the P.O. on Starmer's watch. And the CPS did have the power to intervene and quash these convictions at any time.They have the right to intervene if and when informed; if you know the legal process, mostly the Post Office prosecuted and informed later.
When we’re talking about public prosecutions, the CPS will have known and proceeded, but not to defend them entirely…
… we now know that the PO clearly misconstrued or lied about the evidence they had. Let’s not lose sight who are primarily to blame.
Daveks thought process must resemble a badly deformed pretzel