Home› Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options

Police ask why Mr. Conway isnt going to be charged.

BillieTheBotBillieTheBot Posts: 8,721 Bot
in Politics & Debate
It seems the Police are quite keen to talk to the MP who claimed thousands of pounds of dodgy expenses. Interesting that this sort of fraud is a 'matter for the House' yet benefit cheats should be beaten and sent straight to jail.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7269338.stm
Beep boop. I'm a bot.

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    But he only stole £41,000, its nothing very serious, lets all be adults about this and just give him a slap on the wrist.

    Of course change his name to Imran Aziz, or make him a teenage single mother, and they'd have hanged him by now.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    But he only stole £41,000, its nothing very serious, lets all be adults about this and just give him a slap on the wrist.

    He did get thrown out of the House...for ten days.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Hmm... I detect the card of political interference being played by New Labour's favourite copper here. Think about it - a LibDem MP complains to the cops about cash for honours. Several months of investigation later, nobody is charged. Now, a Tory MP is accused of being on the fiddle, matter isn't reported to the Met, and Sir Ian wants to know why. One can only wonder that, had Peter Hain's wheeling-and-dealing not been reported to the police, would he be writing such a letter?

    Or is he just helping Labour out of a hole yet again?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    There is that as well, mind.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Does the police always need to be referred by somebody before it can investigate whether a crime has been committed?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If there is evidence of a crime the police should be called in. Though I suspect in fraud cases the police aren't going to investigate unless someone makes a complaint
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Flashman's Ghost wrote: »
    If there is evidence of a crime the police should be called in. Though I suspect in fraud cases the police aren't going to investigate unless someone makes a complaint

    Can I complain, probably 1 millionth of a penny of that money was from my tax payments.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Does the police always need to be referred by somebody before it can investigate whether a crime has been committed?
    I suspect they do need someone to make a complaint. I've lost count of the number of newspaper reports where a police spokesperson says "we haven't had a complaint about this, but if we receive one, we will investigate". Following that theory, if someone did contact the cops about it, they'd be duty bound to investigate. It could come from anyone - for example, the cash-for-honours investigation started following a letter to the police from a Liberal Democrat MP.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote: »
    Can I complain, probably 1 millionth of a penny of that money was from my tax payments.

    Don't know - but I can't see why not. If I remember members of the public, not directly impacted on, have complained to the police before. However I guess you would have to have evidence of a crime, and that in this case is the difficult thing to prove - given how lax expenses are for MPs
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    It could come from anyone - for example, the cash-for-honours investigation started following a letter to the police from a Liberal Democrat MP.

    Wasnt it actually Plide Cumree or however the hell you spell that Welsh party.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote: »
    Wasnt it actually Plide Cumree or however the hell you spell that Welsh party.
    On second thoughts, I'd be mistaken, it was indeed them. I suppose it would be a bit odd for LibDems to complain about corruption when one of their donors is now doing porridge at Her Majesty's pleasure...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    its time all goverment bods we monitored VERY closely they are all crooks full stop I'd throw the whole lot out and put in a few common people !
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    simons-photography wrote: »
    its time all goverment bods we monitored VERY closely they are all crooks full stop I'd throw the whole lot out and put in a few common people !
    If we can throw Sir Ian Blair to the lions at the same time, all the better.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    If we can throw Sir Ian Blair to the lions at the same time, all the better.

    toss em all they are all out for their own sakes they quibble overe nothing make fun of each other and in the mean time the country is going down the shit hole. we pay them we should get quality governing ang no stupid laws that are "supposed" to protect the theorectical minority (that in practice don't exist) whilst ruining life for the other 100 % of peolpe,

    such as you can't take pictures of you own kids ? who are the wankers the ones that make stupid laws or the ones that apply them to the letter most times you can tell the difference between a dad taking pictures of his children and a creep and yes it is democratic to tell the creep to fuck off and let the dad take pictures of HIS children.
    sorry son I have no pictures of your first time skating it was against the law to take them
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    simons-photography wrote: »
    such as you can't take pictures of you own kids ? who are the wankers the ones that make stupid laws or the ones that apply them to the letter most times you can tell the difference between a dad taking pictures of his children and a creep and yes it is democratic to tell the creep to fuck off and let the dad take pictures of HIS children.
    sorry son I have no pictures of your first time skating it was against the law to take them

    What the bloody hell are you talking about?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    simons-photography wrote: »
    ...such as you can't take pictures of your own kids? who are the wankers that make stupid laws or the ones that apply them to the letter most times you can tell the difference between a dad taking pictures of his children and a creep and yes it is democratic to tell the creep to fuck off and let the dad take pictures of HIS children.
    What ARE you talking about now? I fail to see what parents apparently not being allowed to take pictures of their kids has to do with Derek Conway's swindling of the public purse.
Sign In or Register to comment.