|
Post by felonious on May 21, 2021 10:47:50 GMT
Fraud is a crime, fraudulent misrepresentation is a civil wrong. If the crime of fraud has not been committed then the civil wrong of fraudulent misrepresentation can be remedied in the civil courts (if not already done so voluntarily by the parties) by voiding the contract and/or damages* *interesting that William is now sabre rattling the BBC - damages claim maybe? I suspect that William would not go for damages - I suspect he would be steered away from that course. However, if Bashir was suggesting that certain employees were on the take, and produced forged documentation to support that claim, surely the people accused have a right to sue him for slander, and the BBC for covering it up? He approached a BBC employee and asked him to create some bank statements for a tv programme leading him to believe it was a drama/play. The man in question was scapegoated by the BBC. Martin Bashir promoted.
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on May 21, 2021 10:48:44 GMT
Fraud is a crime, fraudulent misrepresentation is a civil wrong. If the crime of fraud has not been committed then the civil wrong of fraudulent misrepresentation can be remedied in the civil courts (if not already done so voluntarily by the parties) by voiding the contract and/or damages* *interesting that William is now sabre rattling the BBC - damages claim maybe? I suspect that William would not go for damages - I suspect he would be steered away from that course. However, if Bashir was suggesting that certain employees were on the take, and produced forged documentation to support that claim, surely the people accused have a right to sue him for slander, and the BBC for covering it up? I think you're right v William. I originally put Harry, getting my wires crossed, but the more I think about it... Without knowing the facts about contracts etc it'd be hard to determine if inducement had taken place. I'll leave it to those better equipped than me. Anyway, the card carrying Labour party members of the NUJ at the BBC always prop up the Tories so the government will have no trouble whitewashing this for them.
|
|
|
Post by chuffedstokie on May 21, 2021 10:51:50 GMT
Surely faking a bank statement is a criminal offence? Knowing about it and then covering it up surely is another offence? False instrument. Fraud act 1981. He's used the document to convince someone it's real.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on May 21, 2021 11:37:42 GMT
Regardless of what went on and any underhand tactics by the BBC I don't believe for one minute that Diana was totally blameless and naive. She was a massive attention seeker and manipulator of the press. She knew what she was doing with that interview. Turning the screw and getting her revenge for how she was treated by that family. I'm not saying people shouldn't be held to account but let's not kid ourselves that she was in any way duped,I think she was way to clever for that. I take a totally different view. For me it's on the scale of phone hacking which made the victim believe that people around them could not be trusted leading to broken down relationships with friends and family. With this case it's almost worse because the a BBC employee has forged bank statements showing honest, trusted employees taking money from overseas accounts to spy and report on their employer. It was upsetting to hear one of those loyal employees talking about the methods used by the BBC. If you think this is just about Diana you're very wrong the ripples were felt far and wide. Then there's the whitewash, cover up, back slapping and re employment of a known offender just to compound the injustice. Its widely accepted and known the biggest source of princess diana tips / stories was princess diana herself. The way the story was procured and covered up is clearly wrong but personally I have no doubt she wanted to tell her story and would have done to someone as she had already effectively ghostwritten andrew morton's book.
|
|
|
Post by phileetin on May 21, 2021 11:39:38 GMT
Fraud is a crime, fraudulent misrepresentation is a civil wrong. If the crime of fraud has not been committed then the civil wrong of fraudulent misrepresentation can be remedied in the civil courts (if not already done so voluntarily by the parties) by voiding the contract and/or damages* *interesting that William is now sabre rattling the BBC - damages claim maybe? I suspect that William would not go for damages - I suspect he would be steered away from that course. However, if Bashir was suggesting that certain employees were on the take, and produced forged documentation to support that claim, surely the people accused have a right to sue him for slander, and the BBC for covering it up?
Harry will ,
he's ex pat now
He's after some dosh
He was drinking alcohol and contemplating drugs
sounds like he's after summat to me
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on May 21, 2021 11:52:04 GMT
The guys got issues and is currently trying to sue Notts Police as he’s been raided 3-4 times. When you say "the guy's got issues", do you mean him? Or are his issues due to being persecuted by Nottingham Police? All you've told me for the last few months is that police corruption isn't a thing and I'm talking bollocks, among other things. I watched his videos about the BBC and Nottingham Police, primarily because of what you said. Do you not find him a cliche ridden twit? It's genuinely painful watching him blart on and on about himself with grandiose statements like "It's a national disgrace" and "the worst cover-up in Nottingham Police history" etc. Despite watching a good 20+ minutes of this shite, I still couldn't actually make sense of what he was claiming to have happened. Some BBC person posted something, somewhere or to someone, about Alex Bellend and now the police are raiding his house or some shit, rah rah. Feel free to post the video of a nice, clear and concise timeline of what he is accusing them of and I will watch and listen. The reality is though, his videos are all bluster... audible fucking poison. He also continuously refers to Prince William as our 'Future King' as if this somehow elevates him to a kind of superhero status. Just fucking aids-ridden content mate. i meant he’s got issues in relation to his mental health. He gets obsessed with certain issues and attacks them. BBC, Police and Katie Price being prime examples. In relation to police corruption. Of course it exists though in my opinion it’s far less widespread in my opinion than what you think it is.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on May 21, 2021 12:00:27 GMT
I take a totally different view. For me it's on the scale of phone hacking which made the victim believe that people around them could not be trusted leading to broken down relationships with friends and family. With this case it's almost worse because the a BBC employee has forged bank statements showing honest, trusted employees taking money from overseas accounts to spy and report on their employer. It was upsetting to hear one of those loyal employees talking about the methods used by the BBC. If you think this is just about Diana you're very wrong the ripples were felt far and wide. Then there's the whitewash, cover up, back slapping and re employment of a known offender just to compound the injustice. Its widely accepted and known the biggest source of princess diana tips / stories was princess diana herself. The way the story was procured and covered up is clearly wrong but personally I have no doubt she wanted to tell her story and would have done to someone as she had already effectively ghostwritten andrew morton's book. It all comes back to the same thing though the national broadcaster behaving no better than the Sun or the News of the World. The earlier programme suggested that she was refusing interviews this completely deceitful approach secured the interview.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on May 21, 2021 12:03:27 GMT
Fraud is a crime, fraudulent misrepresentation is a civil wrong. If the crime of fraud has not been committed then the civil wrong of fraudulent misrepresentation can be remedied in the civil courts (if not already done so voluntarily by the parties) by voiding the contract and/or damages* *interesting that William is now sabre rattling the BBC - damages claim maybe? I suspect that William would not go for damages - I suspect he would be steered away from that course. However, if Bashir was suggesting that certain employees were on the take, and produced forged documentation to support that claim, surely the people accused have a right to sue him for slander, and the BBC for covering it up? Here's the guy who produced the forged statement, he's also the whistle blower, he also never worked for the BBC again. It's an interesting article which also sheds light on the poor working culture at the BBC/ Panorama. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57199164
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on May 21, 2021 12:23:59 GMT
The BBC...propping up the Tories since 2010. You’re becoming such a parody I’m beginning to think your a dyed in the wool Tory voter On a monumental windup
|
|
|
Post by shakermaker on May 21, 2021 15:44:57 GMT
Fraud is a crime, fraudulent misrepresentation is a civil wrong. If the crime of fraud has not been committed then the civil wrong of fraudulent misrepresentation can be remedied in the civil courts (if not already done so voluntarily by the parties) by voiding the contract and/or damages* *interesting that William is now sabre rattling the BBC - damages claim maybe? I suspect that William would not go for damages - I suspect he would be steered away from that course. However, if Bashir was suggesting that certain employees were on the take, and produced forged documentation to support that claim, surely the people accused have a right to sue him for slander, and the BBC for covering it up? Maybe not monetary damages, but now that this scandal is out in the open then William and Harry are within their rights to push for prosecution in Diana's honour. If Bashir broke the Fraud Act, then the whistleblower should testify in court against him if Bashir led him to believe producing those faked statements was for a different programme. He also needs to name BBC executives who brushed him aside when he raised concerns. Secondly, Lord Hall has come out this looking pretty shameless. There is a real case for having his peerage rescinded.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on May 22, 2021 5:08:27 GMT
BBC will get chance to make changes itself - government sourceThis sounds a bit like the Gvt washing it’s hands, but it’s hard to see what else they can do apart from the nuclear option - which I would like to see - and bin the licence fee. The specific circumstances that existed when Bashir cheated his way to an interview no longer exist. The problem is that the cultural norms at the BBC that both allowed and nurtured that behaviour, namely colossal arrogance and entitlement, are part of its DNA. There is no cure for that other than cutting it lose. I suspect the current Government feels the time is not right and this story isn’t the trigger to make that happen. Understandable but, still, a shame.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on May 22, 2021 7:18:19 GMT
The BBC...propping up the Tories since 2010. You’re becoming such a parody I’m beginning to think your a dyed in the wool Tory voter On a monumental windup Again, feel free to provide me with evidence to the contrary.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on May 22, 2021 7:27:54 GMT
Without the license fee, the BBC would collapse. The movement to abolish the fee has never been stronger and it's no surprise when you see the quality of content on their channels.
I jumped on iPlayer for a laugh and the recommended viewing is Shrill, a 'comedy drama' (I expect a loose interpretation) about a body positive fat woman who's on a mission to have one night stands and not give a shit what her family or friends think. Truly high quality content made for whiny millennials.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on May 22, 2021 7:30:46 GMT
You’re becoming such a parody I’m beginning to think your a dyed in the wool Tory voter On a monumental windup Again, feel free to provide me with evidence to the contrary. 😁😁😁 Repeatedly I’ve asked you for proof of the shit you post off Twitter Silence Repeatedly I’ve asked questions silence You have every right to post what you want but if you post continual Twitter non entities spouting un proven biased shit Then I shall retain the right to point it out
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on May 22, 2021 7:35:07 GMT
Surely the correct response from the BBC into the findings of the Dyson report is simply to ignore them and allow the people involved to just carry on!
Preferably with Lord Dyson resigning.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on May 22, 2021 8:43:03 GMT
Again, feel free to provide me with evidence to the contrary. 😁😁😁 Repeatedly I’ve asked you for proof of the shit you post off Twitter Silence Repeatedly I’ve asked questions silence You have every right to post what you want but if you post continual Twitter non entities spouting un proven biased shit Then I shall retain the right to point it out So like the rest of the gammons on here, you can't.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on May 22, 2021 8:55:16 GMT
😁😁😁 Repeatedly I’ve asked you for proof of the shit you post off Twitter Silence Repeatedly I’ve asked questions silence You have every right to post what you want but if you post continual Twitter non entities spouting un proven biased shit Then I shall retain the right to point it out So like the rest of the gammons on here, you can't. Please sir what are gammons ?
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on May 22, 2021 9:40:15 GMT
😁😁😁 Repeatedly I’ve asked you for proof of the shit you post off Twitter Silence Repeatedly I’ve asked questions silence You have every right to post what you want but if you post continual Twitter non entities spouting un proven biased shit Then I shall retain the right to point it out So like the rest of the gammons on here, you can't. Well well having to resort to a personal insult Who would of thought it Shall we go back a couple of posts to the post that started our latest discussion The bbc propping up the Tory’s since 2010 I’m quite happy to say I’m wrong if you can possibly prove that they have And as a apology I’m prepared to purchase a years subscription to socialist worker Just remember fact and opinions often get blurred
|
|
|
Post by felonious on May 22, 2021 11:30:51 GMT
So like the rest of the gammons on here, you can't. Well well having to resort to a personal insult Who would of thought it Shall we go back a couple of posts to the post that started are latest discussion The bbc propping up the Tory’s since 2010 I’m quite happy to say I’m wrong if you can possibly prove that they have And as a apology I’m prepared to purchase a years subscription to socialist worker Just remember fact and opinions often get blurred The interesting thing Wag is that if he'd listened to the news reports last the night the suggestion was that this was an opportunity for the Conservatives to go after the BBC. Why would that be suggested if the BBC were propping the Conservative party up?
|
|
|
Post by felonious on May 22, 2021 11:44:41 GMT
BBC will get chance to make changes itself - government sourceThis sounds a bit like the Gvt washing it’s hands, but it’s hard to see what else they can do apart from the nuclear option - which I would like to see - and bin the licence fee. The specific circumstances that existed when Bashir cheated his way to an interview no longer exist. The problem is that the cultural norms at the BBC that both allowed and nurtured that behaviour, namely colossal arrogance and entitlement, are part of its DNA. There is no cure for that other than cutting it lose. I suspect the current Government feels the time is not right and this story isn’t the trigger to make that happen. Understandable but, still, a shame. I don't think any government of any flavour can go after the BBC. Even if they have a more independent panel to report to the chief executives can still bring lies and half truths to them as they did to the board of governors in this case as reported on in the Panorama programme this week, how ironic. The BBC is in a position to make the news which can be damaging to any government so it would take a brave PM to take them on. The BBC are still playing the rogue reporter claim but the fact is that two whistle blowers were ignored even ostracised and the top brass buried the story with lies. Lord Dyson said that investigation - led by then-director of news, and future director general, Lord Hall - was "woefully ineffective". And as scrutiny from the press increased, the BBC gave "evasive" answers to journalists' questions, he said. When the BBC was asked about the bank statements by journalists in March 1996, senior BBC officials - including Lord Hall - already knew Bashir had lied three times about not having shown them to Earl Spencer, the report said. But the BBC press office told journalists that Bashir was "an honest and honourable man". www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57189371
|
|
|
Post by felonious on May 22, 2021 11:51:12 GMT
First resignation after the report. Tim Suter has resigned from Offcom.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on May 22, 2021 14:35:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by shakermaker on May 22, 2021 16:28:18 GMT
Resignations from meaningless positions don’t really change anything. As I said before, this deceitful bastard needs to have his peerage taken away. It would be a farce if he was allowed to stay a Lord after being shown to be a liar, advocated practicing the dark arts on his watch, and being an intimidating bully in the workplace.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on May 22, 2021 16:39:24 GMT
I would think that simply faking a bank statement is not a criminal offence. Using it to gain credit or money is probably fraud. Using it to set up a TV interview with someone – it’s probably deception or misrepresentation, but is it a criminal offence? Likewise the BBC – It has aided and abetted a deception, but has it actually broken a law (other than morally)? Perhaps our resident Liberal solicitor might offer an opinion? Fraud is a crime, fraudulent misrepresentation is a civil wrong. If the crime of fraud has not been committed then the civil wrong of fraudulent misrepresentation can be remedied in the civil courts (if not already done so voluntarily by the parties) by voiding the contract and/or damages* *interesting that William is now sabre rattling the BBC - damages claim maybe? Can’t see William pursuing a damages claim But I wouldn’t put it past Harry doing a I blame the bbc for me appearing pissed in a nazi uniform Oprah shitshow
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on May 22, 2021 17:08:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by felonious on May 22, 2021 17:09:43 GMT
Fraud is a crime, fraudulent misrepresentation is a civil wrong. If the crime of fraud has not been committed then the civil wrong of fraudulent misrepresentation can be remedied in the civil courts (if not already done so voluntarily by the parties) by voiding the contract and/or damages* *interesting that William is now sabre rattling the BBC - damages claim maybe? Can’t see William pursuing a damages claim But I wouldn’t put it past Harry doing a I blame the bbc for me appearing pissed in a nazi uniform Oprah shitshow It must have been so easy for them Wag losing a doting mother at an early age knowing that she was pursued to that early grave by the paparazzi and the gutter press. They've both admitted to mental health issues and to be fair to them they both seem to want to put something back into life for others. The BBC being as far in the gutter as the tabloids must be incredibly upsetting for them.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on May 22, 2021 17:14:49 GMT
Can’t see William pursuing a damages claim But I wouldn’t put it past Harry doing a I blame the bbc for me appearing pissed in a nazi uniform Oprah shitshow It must have been so easy for them Wag losing a doting mother at an early age knowing that she was pursued to that early grave by the paparazzi and the gutter press. They've both admitted to mental health issues and to be fair to them they both seem to want to put something back into life for others. The BBC being as far in the gutter as the tabloids must be incredibly upsetting for them. Oh I agree with a lot of that But to continue to blame the media for this and that but then to whore yourself for monetary gain to the biggest media circus in America Smacks to me of a slight degree of hypocrisy
|
|
|
Post by felonious on May 22, 2021 17:30:53 GMT
It must have been so easy for them Wag losing a doting mother at an early age knowing that she was pursued to that early grave by the paparazzi and the gutter press. They've both admitted to mental health issues and to be fair to them they both seem to want to put something back into life for others. The BBC being as far in the gutter as the tabloids must be incredibly upsetting for them. Oh I agree with a lot of that But to continue to blame the media for this and that but then to whore yourself for monetary gain to the biggest media circus in America Smacks to me of a slight degree of hypocrisy I think he was saying the same things before he was whoring himself in America. No doubt he's responding to questions about this week's report being released. They're both bitter and I don't blame them. Their uncle was band on the money with his comments on the Panorama programme.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on May 23, 2021 12:25:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on May 23, 2021 14:50:26 GMT
Well you can generally gather the merit of a article by the people who are condemning it
|
|