- Joined
- 18 Apr 2022
- Messages
- 4,421
- Reaction score
- 522
- Country
I am, truly, amazed.
So the contractors working for Transco were found to have committed an actual criminal offence by lining gas pipes. Surely to god that would have to have been a private prosecution, because what sane, reasonable CPS official would regard it as in the public interest to prosecute the contractors?
And why didn't the CPS have the cojones to take over the prosecution and discontinue it on the grounds that it was against the public interest?
In whose interest was it? Neither the developer nor the original land owners would have benefited from the fine, so even if they had suffered a loss (how???) where was the justification for a criminal prosecution?
All sounds very fishy, and neither Bing nor Google can find anything relating to it.
So the contractors working for Transco were found to have committed an actual criminal offence by lining gas pipes. Surely to god that would have to have been a private prosecution, because what sane, reasonable CPS official would regard it as in the public interest to prosecute the contractors?
And why didn't the CPS have the cojones to take over the prosecution and discontinue it on the grounds that it was against the public interest?
In whose interest was it? Neither the developer nor the original land owners would have benefited from the fine, so even if they had suffered a loss (how???) where was the justification for a criminal prosecution?
All sounds very fishy, and neither Bing nor Google can find anything relating to it.
Last edited:
