She might be cutting her nose off to spite her face Soozy.
Originally Posted by velvet donkey:
She might be cutting her nose off to spite her face Soozy.
Have you noticed, one side of her face doesn't match the other side.? 
Originally Posted by velvet donkey:
She might be cutting her nose off to spite her face Soozy.
Indeed .............................but - I quite like to see the arrogant B bought down.
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
It's all gone a bit 
I suppose once solicitors are involved it's inevitable - shameful really - he hasn't really admitted anything has he? I think he's a bit of a scunmag and although it's gone a bit too far I don't really blame her for what she's done. He comes across as a totally arrogant to**er IMO.
He pleaded guilty Sooz, and ABSOBLOODYLUTELY
Does anyone really believe that he made her have an abortion.?
Originally Posted by Baz:
Originally Posted by Videostar:
Does anyone really believe that he made her have an abortion.?
I have no idea Video..... but she is obviously on a mission!!
Ain't that the truth.
But the picture she paints of him as a bullying, controlling type of husband is at odds with the fact that he's a Lib Dem MP, Liberal men tend to be limp wristed guys who are wishy washy new men nappy changer types.
I dont know who to believe. 
Oh sh*te, I just remembered I voted Lib Dem in the last election. 
Originally Posted by Videostar:
But the picture she paints of him as a bullying, controlling type of husband is at odds with the fact that he's a Lib Dem MP, Liberal men tend to be limp wristed guys who are wishy washy new men nappy changer types.
I dont know who to believe.
Well, I think he has obviously done wrong (both publicly and privately) and made it far worse by lying! Having said that, she comes across as a very bitter sour puss, so.....
Originally Posted by Videostar:
Does anyone really believe that he made her have an abortion.?
I think she should have kept that as a private family matter tbh....
Originally Posted by Supes:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
It's all gone a bit
I suppose once solicitors are involved it's inevitable - shameful really - he hasn't really admitted anything has he? I think he's a bit of a scunmag and although it's gone a bit too far I don't really blame her for what she's done. He comes across as a totally arrogant to**er IMO.
He pleaded guilty Sooz, and ABSOBLOODYLUTELY
Maybe I'm being pedantic - I think there was something a bit 'back handed' in his statement IMO.
Speaking outside court, Huhne said: "Having taken responsibility for something that happened 10 years ago, the only proper course of action for me is to resign my Eastleigh seat in Parliament, which I will do shortly."
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Originally Posted by Supes:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
It's all gone a bit
I suppose once solicitors are involved it's inevitable - shameful really - he hasn't really admitted anything has he? I think he's a bit of a scunmag and although it's gone a bit too far I don't really blame her for what she's done. He comes across as a totally arrogant to**er IMO.
He pleaded guilty Sooz, and ABSOBLOODYLUTELY
Maybe I'm being pedantic - I think there was something a bit 'back handed' in his statement IMO.
Speaking outside court, Huhne said: "Having taken responsibility for something that happened 10 years ago, the only proper course of action for me is to resign my Eastleigh seat in Parliament, which I will do shortly."
Absolutely - wheres his remorse or admission of guilt? Its like he's detached from his actions completely.
Huhne, 58, and Pryce, 60, were both was jailed in March for perverting the course of justice a decade ago. The former MP asked his then wife to take his speeding points so could fight an election without a driving ban. She blew the whistle on him in revenge for his affair with his bisexual PR officer Carina Trimingham (bottom left). Her lawyer Robert Brown said as she arrived home today: 'She now intends to spend time with her family and looks forward to returning to her career as an economist.' It is understood the mother of five has spent the past eight weeks writing a 'tell-all' memoir to inflict ongoing revenge on her former husband. The former couple will both wear electronic tags and be under curfews while serving the remainder of their sentences on licence
It feels like only yesterday that they were sent down...oh wait, it was only yesterday.
To think of all the man hours spent on the trial, the cost and all the dirty washing that was aired in public ,for such a short time served.Madness.!
If I'm honest this doesn't bother me too much. They've had their day in court and were granted a punishment - they've served a bit of time inside and have been released on licence. It's not like they're a danger to society. Our prisons are already overcrowded - they've had a shock - they've been humiliated (or humiliated themselves). Can't see the point in keeping them locked up anymore TBH.
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
If I'm honest this doesn't bother me too much. They've had their day in court and were granted a punishment - they've served a bit of time inside and have been released on licence. It's not like they're a danger to society. Our prisons are already overcrowded - they've had a shock - they've been humiliated (or humiliated themselves). Can't see the point in keeping them locked up anymore TBH.
I agree 
Originally Posted by MrsH:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
If I'm honest this doesn't bother me too much. They've had their day in court and were granted a punishment - they've served a bit of time inside and have been released on licence. It's not like they're a danger to society. Our prisons are already overcrowded - they've had a shock - they've been humiliated (or humiliated themselves). Can't see the point in keeping them locked up anymore TBH.
I agree
Me too - but it would be interesting to see how many 'ordinary' people guilty of the same crime walk after a quarter of their sentence instead of the customary half. Maybe it's the done thing - I'd like to think so.
Originally Posted by KaffyBaffy:
Originally Posted by MrsH:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
If I'm honest this doesn't bother me too much. They've had their day in court and were granted a punishment - they've served a bit of time inside and have been released on licence. It's not like they're a danger to society. Our prisons are already overcrowded - they've had a shock - they've been humiliated (or humiliated themselves). Can't see the point in keeping them locked up anymore TBH.
I agree
Me too - but it would be interesting to see how many 'ordinary' people guilty of the same crime walk after a quarter of their sentence instead of the customary half. Maybe it's the done thing - I'd like to think so.
Very interesting Kaffy 
Originally Posted by erinp:
To think of all the man hours spent on the trial, the cost and all the dirty washing that was aired in public ,for such a short time served.Madness.!
Agreed.
I bet regular folks wouldn't get out of prison so soon for the same offence.
Originally Posted by Videostar:
Originally Posted by erinp:
To think of all the man hours spent on the trial, the cost and all the dirty washing that was aired in public ,for such a short time served.Madness.!
Agreed.
I bet regular folks wouldn't get out of prison so soon for the same offence.
If it's the cost that's the worry surely it'd cost more to keep them inside. Their sentence will go on their record - they still 'serve the time' they are simply outside in licence rather than in prison.
Originally Posted by KaffyBaffy:
Originally Posted by MrsH:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
If I'm honest this doesn't bother me too much. They've had their day in court and were granted a punishment - they've served a bit of time inside and have been released on licence. It's not like they're a danger to society. Our prisons are already overcrowded - they've had a shock - they've been humiliated (or humiliated themselves). Can't see the point in keeping them locked up anymore TBH.
I agree
Me too - but it would be interesting to see how many 'ordinary' people guilty of the same crime walk after a quarter of their sentence instead of the customary half. Maybe it's the done thing - I'd like to think so.
I agree with both of you
she said in her statement that she's going to return to her job as an economist - she should count herself lucky that she's able to return to such a high powered job after serving time however, with all the dirty laundry washed in court, who in their right mind could look at her in all honesty respect what she says any more? She's done so much damage to her reputation and that is a big punishment in itself.
Gaols are very overcrowded but I do wonder if 'ordinary' white collar criminals or those of a similar standing would have been released after a quarter of the sentence has been served
Should never have been jailed.
The farce that is the British Judiciary.
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Originally Posted by Videostar:
Originally Posted by erinp:
To think of all the man hours spent on the trial, the cost and all the dirty washing that was aired in public ,for such a short time served.Madness.!
Agreed.
I bet regular folks wouldn't get out of prison so soon for the same offence.
If it's the cost that's the worry surely it'd cost more to keep them inside. Their sentence will go on their record - they still 'serve the time' they are simply outside in licence rather than in prison.
I was referring to the legal cost of the trial not to mention her reputation.
Originally Posted by moonie:
Originally Posted by velvet donkey:
Should never have been jailed.
The farce that is the British Judiciary.
Nope, hung, drawn and quartered. Save on prison bills
Come on.
Never trust a judge.
Originally Posted by KaffyBaffy:
Originally Posted by MrsH:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
If I'm honest this doesn't bother me too much. They've had their day in court and were granted a punishment - they've served a bit of time inside and have been released on licence. It's not like they're a danger to society. Our prisons are already overcrowded - they've had a shock - they've been humiliated (or humiliated themselves). Can't see the point in keeping them locked up anymore TBH.
I agree
Me too - but it would be interesting to see how many 'ordinary' people guilty of the same crime walk after a quarter of their sentence instead of the customary half. Maybe it's the done thing - I'd like to think so.
Kaffy, in Scotland, you can apply for HDC (tagging) once you have 6 months left of your sentence, so the system is the same for 'ordinary' prisoners.
I don't believe they have been given preferential treatment. In fact, for the type of crime they committed, a less high profile person would likely have been given a shorter sentence.
I don't condone what Hune did, but it seems somewhat unfair that his wife, who opened this whole can of worms in a fit of spite (imo), can walk straight back into her career, whilst his is in tatters.
I think I might be swimming against the forum tide on this one.
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Originally Posted by Videostar:
Originally Posted by erinp:
To think of all the man hours spent on the trial, the cost and all the dirty washing that was aired in public ,for such a short time served.Madness.!
Agreed.
I bet regular folks wouldn't get out of prison so soon for the same offence.
If it's the cost that's the worry surely it'd cost more to keep them inside. Their sentence will go on their record - they still 'serve the time' they are simply outside in licence rather than in prison.
I'd rather they stayed in prison, until I decided they could be set free. 
Originally Posted by Yogi19:
Originally Posted by KaffyBaffy:
Originally Posted by MrsH:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
If I'm honest this doesn't bother me too much. They've had their day in court and were granted a punishment - they've served a bit of time inside and have been released on licence. It's not like they're a danger to society. Our prisons are already overcrowded - they've had a shock - they've been humiliated (or humiliated themselves). Can't see the point in keeping them locked up anymore TBH.
I agree
Me too - but it would be interesting to see how many 'ordinary' people guilty of the same crime walk after a quarter of their sentence instead of the customary half. Maybe it's the done thing - I'd like to think so.
Kaffy, in Scotland, you can apply for HDC (tagging) once you have 6 months left of your sentence, so the system is the same for 'ordinary' prisoners.
I don't believe they have been given preferential treatment. In fact, for the type of crime they committed, a less high profile person would likely have been given a shorter sentence.
I don't condone what Hune did, but it seems somewhat unfair that his wife, who opened this whole can of worms in a fit of spite (imo), can walk straight back into her career, whilst his is in tatters.
I think I might be swimming against the forum tide on this one.
But you are strong swimmer Yogi 
Originally Posted by Videostar:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Originally Posted by Videostar:
Originally Posted by erinp:
To think of all the man hours spent on the trial, the cost and all the dirty washing that was aired in public ,for such a short time served.Madness.!
Agreed.
I bet regular folks wouldn't get out of prison so soon for the same offence.
If it's the cost that's the worry surely it'd cost more to keep them inside. Their sentence will go on their record - they still 'serve the time' they are simply outside in licence rather than in prison.
I'd rather they stayed in prison, until I decided they could be set free.
Originally Posted by moonie:
Originally Posted by Yogi19:
Originally Posted by KaffyBaffy:
Originally Posted by MrsH:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
If I'm honest this doesn't bother me too much. They've had their day in court and were granted a punishment - they've served a bit of time inside and have been released on licence. It's not like they're a danger to society. Our prisons are already overcrowded - they've had a shock - they've been humiliated (or humiliated themselves). Can't see the point in keeping them locked up anymore TBH.
I agree
Me too - but it would be interesting to see how many 'ordinary' people guilty of the same crime walk after a quarter of their sentence instead of the customary half. Maybe it's the done thing - I'd like to think so.
Kaffy, in Scotland, you can apply for HDC (tagging) once you have 6 months left of your sentence, so the system is the same for 'ordinary' prisoners.
I don't believe they have been given preferential treatment. In fact, for the type of crime they committed, a less high profile person would likely have been given a shorter sentence.
I don't condone what Hune did, but it seems somewhat unfair that his wife, who opened this whole can of worms in a fit of spite (imo), can walk straight back into her career, whilst his is in tatters.
I think I might be swimming against the forum tide on this one.
But you are strong swimmer Yogi
Originally Posted by Yogi19:
Originally Posted by KaffyBaffy:
Originally Posted by MrsH:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
If I'm honest this doesn't bother me too much. They've had their day in court and were granted a punishment - they've served a bit of time inside and have been released on licence. It's not like they're a danger to society. Our prisons are already overcrowded - they've had a shock - they've been humiliated (or humiliated themselves). Can't see the point in keeping them locked up anymore TBH.
I agree
Me too - but it would be interesting to see how many 'ordinary' people guilty of the same crime walk after a quarter of their sentence instead of the customary half. Maybe it's the done thing - I'd like to think so.
Kaffy, in Scotland, you can apply for HDC (tagging) once you have 6 months left of your sentence, so the system is the same for 'ordinary' prisoners.
I don't believe they have been given preferential treatment. In fact, for the type of crime they committed, a less high profile person would likely have been given a shorter sentence.
I don't condone what Hune did, but it seems somewhat unfair that his wife, who opened this whole can of worms in a fit of spite (imo), can walk straight back into her career, whilst his is in tatters.
I think I might be swimming against the forum tide on this one.
Thanks yogi - I genuinely wasn't sure about the tagging thing (assuming it's the same in England) I do think it's a nonsense that they were jailed in first place, but then lots of sentencing is a nonsense in the other direction too. I suppose it remains to be seen how both their careers will turn out - his may be in tatters now, but that's not stopped other politicians resurfacing has it? Would I trust either of them as far as I could chuck them? Nope. Does that go for most other politicians? Yep.
Originally Posted by KaffyBaffy:
Originally Posted by Yogi19:
Originally Posted by KaffyBaffy:
Originally Posted by MrsH:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
If I'm honest this doesn't bother me too much. They've had their day in court and were granted a punishment - they've served a bit of time inside and have been released on licence. It's not like they're a danger to society. Our prisons are already overcrowded - they've had a shock - they've been humiliated (or humiliated themselves). Can't see the point in keeping them locked up anymore TBH.
I agree
Me too - but it would be interesting to see how many 'ordinary' people guilty of the same crime walk after a quarter of their sentence instead of the customary half. Maybe it's the done thing - I'd like to think so.
Kaffy, in Scotland, you can apply for HDC (tagging) once you have 6 months left of your sentence, so the system is the same for 'ordinary' prisoners.
I don't believe they have been given preferential treatment. In fact, for the type of crime they committed, a less high profile person would likely have been given a shorter sentence.
I don't condone what Hune did, but it seems somewhat unfair that his wife, who opened this whole can of worms in a fit of spite (imo), can walk straight back into her career, whilst his is in tatters.
I think I might be swimming against the forum tide on this one.
Thanks yogi - I genuinely wasn't sure about the tagging thing (assuming it's the same in England) I do think it's a nonsense that they were jailed in first place, but then lots of sentencing is a nonsense in the other direction too. I suppose it remains to be seen how both their careers will turn out - his may be in tatters now, but that's not stopped other politicians resurfacing has it? Would I trust either of them as far as I could chuck them? Nope. Does that go for most other politicians? Yep.
In agreement with you.
theres many a mickle makes a muckle
NOT.A.CLUE.
Originally Posted by Yogi19:
Originally Posted by KaffyBaffy:
Originally Posted by MrsH:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
If I'm honest this doesn't bother me too much. They've had their day in court and were granted a punishment - they've served a bit of time inside and have been released on licence. It's not like they're a danger to society. Our prisons are already overcrowded - they've had a shock - they've been humiliated (or humiliated themselves). Can't see the point in keeping them locked up anymore TBH.
I agree
Me too - but it would be interesting to see how many 'ordinary' people guilty of the same crime walk after a quarter of their sentence instead of the customary half. Maybe it's the done thing - I'd like to think so.
Kaffy, in Scotland, you can apply for HDC (tagging) once you have 6 months left of your sentence, so the system is the same for 'ordinary' prisoners.
I don't believe they have been given preferential treatment. In fact, for the type of crime they committed, a less high profile person would likely have been given a shorter sentence.
I don't condone what Hune did, but it seems somewhat unfair that his wife, who opened this whole can of worms in a fit of spite (imo), can walk straight back into her career, whilst his is in tatters.
I think I might be swimming against the forum tide on this one.
I agree about the evil bunny boiler, it does seem that cow will go back to her day job like nothing ever happened, if anything what she did was worse than him.
