This Haynes caper

[transam]

where he used parliamentary privilege to circum navigate a high court non disclosure ruling over this Green bloke

Was he right to do so ? I am of the opinion that he was not ? And I do not see what useful purpose it served ? Innocent to proven guilty and all that ect

 

[sodthisforfun]

I am glad he did it. I don't see why those with loadsamoney can pay for press silence when the rest of us would have suffer.
It also gives other people a chance to come forward if they know about it.

 

[transam]

I am glad he did it. I don't see why those with loadsamoney can pay for press silence when the rest of us would have suffer.
It also gives other people a chance to come forward if they know about it.

A considered answer but I would for now disagree with you

Must admit that Dominic Greive gave a good response to this on the radio yesterday

 

[Yafo]

where he used parliamentary privilege to circum navigate a high court non disclosure ruling over this Green bloke

Was he right to do so ? I am of the opinion that he was not ? And I do not see what useful purpose it served ? Innocent to proven guilty and all that ect

It is a tough 1 if you consider all the angles.

But can you accept that money and power can place you in an untouchable position. I don't like that, so I support the naming of him, and others like him. Where does it stop? What is acceptable with enough money and power ?

He has sufficient funds and connections to be able to clear his name if he has been maligned. What about those who may have suffered?

Are nva's acceptable for this type of thing is the real question surely?

 

[transam]

I would agree about the money aspect green being a multi millionaire and can there fore aford the best lawyers ? We're as the ordinary bloke in the street cannot

But surely the rule of law must apply irrespective of weather no one likes the bloke

High court judges looked at the non disclosure orders and found them to be perfectly legal and did not infringe any ones rights ect

Also the complainants supported the injunction

 

[EFLImpudence]

How exactly are these 'victims' coerced into signing non-disclosure agreements?

Are they threatened with having to be a witness if they don't agree to it?

I don't think I have heard anyone condemn any of these 'victims' for accepting the money.

 

[sodthisforfun]

How exactly are these 'victims' coerced into signing non-disclosure agreements?

Are they threatened with having to be a witness if they don't agree to it?

I don't think I have heard anyone condemn any of these 'victims' for accepting the money.

I guess some felt powerless and feeling like they won't be believed like those victims over the years with Saville & Weinstein?
And these are powerful, rich people that the little person would be going against.

 

[transam]

Apparently this case is very complex ?

Conflicting interests , issues of free speech , evidence and law which were "going" to get a "fair" and independent hearing

Hains intervention has ensured that this is one thing which "all" involved including potential victims have now been denied ??

 

[JohnD]

If you were a vile racist, sexist, abusive, bullying person, it must give you some comfort if you were also so rich that you thought you could hush up reports of your vile character.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Twas ever thus.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I guess some felt powerless and feeling like they won't be believed like those victims over the years with Saville & Weinstein?

You mean they couldn't have remained silent for free - as others have since time began?

And these are powerful, rich people that the little person would be going against.

So, they accepted a wad for doing what they would have done anyway.


Take Stormy Daniels:

A perfectly legal relationship with Trump.
Either, she was paid to keep quiet; making her a prostitute, or
she threatened to go public and was paid to keep quiet; making her a blackmailer and extortionist.

 

[sodthisforfun]

You mean they couldn't have remained silent for free - as others have since time began?


So, they accepted a wad for doing what they would have done anyway.


Take Stormy Daniels:

A perfectly legal relationship with Trump.
Either, she was paid to keep quiet; making her a prostitute, or
she threatened to go public and was paid to keep quiet; making her a blackmailer and extortionist.

They could've remained silent for free, but then I suppose the people with money wouldn't like that loose cannon. Get it in a contract, pay some dosh and then they own ya.

Who knows why people take money? Greed, defeated, skint, compensation? You'd have to ask them. I'm certainly not going to victim blame. Am sure they didn't ask for this.

 

[Brigadier]

Take Stormy Daniels:

A perfectly legal relationship with Trump.
Either, she was paid to keep quiet; making her a prostitute, or
she threatened to go public and was paid to keep quiet; making her a blackmailer and extortionist.

If he wasn't such a bullying, lying, coward, he'd have not given a shoite.
Works both ways.

 

[sodthisforfun]

If he wasn't such a bullying, lying, coward, he'd have not given a shoite.

Certainly some truth in that description of Trump!
Perhaps he should've just kept it in his pants in the first place, considering he was married and all, then none of this would've happened.

 

[motorbiking]

There has to be a payment in some form or other, otherwise its just a promise and can't be enforced.