A summer of humiliation beckons

Aardvark · 05-06-2007, 11:12 AM

Calm down guys, let's try to keep this thread on topic. :roll:

Petrina · 05-06-2007, 12:03 PM

I think you should all know that an injunction was issued by a High Court Judge on all reports in this country of any of the preliminary proceedings in Mote`s case .

Perhaps the moderators on this forum would like to take this into account in relation to this thread .

Aardvark · 05-06-2007, 12:25 PM

I have a copy of the injunction at home and its predecessor. The fact of the cases may be discussed. The fact of the charges may be discussed. Nobody here has produced any of the evidence, although oddly I do have some of it which you can have privately at some time after the case has commenced. Nobody is questioning Ashley Mote's innocence, we are dicussing completely separate issues, his claim for immunity and his desire to prevent publicity for the case.

The fact of the matter is that AM has sought to use his position as MEP to seek immunity from prosecution when he has spent an inordinate amount fo time and effort condemning those who use the same immunity elsewhere - it's in his books for a start. I neither know nor care any more whether Mr Mote is innocent or not, what grieves me is the hypocrisy of someone who condemns the use of immunity, but tries to use it himself.

The facts of the hearings published here are taken from open source material and, should you subscribe to the correct section on the europa.eu site, you can read the judgement referred to as it is available online for the entire world to see. The eis site also requires a subscription and indeed the material posted at the start of the thread came from a subscription only site, but every lawyer subscribed to those sites has access to the judgements. Law reports are not confidential, but are expensive to get copies of because of the cost of preparation, as you know Petrina.

As I stated, AM assured me of his innocence (this was at the time I started working for him). I have not seen most of the evidence in the case so could not comment further.

I do not know what the outcome of the case will be, but the issues of immunity and the attempt to prevent an open hearing will be hot topics. I believe firmly that our legal system should be open and fair and that nobody in any public position should be above the law. Surely I am allowed to discuss those concepts.

chikrodah · 05-06-2007, 12:26 PM

Thanks for the warning. However, most of us already know about the injunction. It was posted, and dissected in detail, here, as well as in other threads.

Quote:

The Judge hearing the case, Justice J. Sessions, made a ruling on 25 November under Section 4, subsection 2 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1981.

The ruling was:

“It is ordered that no report be published of the nature of, or decisions on, any matter of law raised in these proceedings, before conclusion of the trial. This order will remain in effect until the delivery of verdicts by the jury, or until further order in the meantime”.

Of course, I'm not a legal expert.

I'm not convinced that it could be argued successfully that separate proceedings in the Court of First Instance relating to Mote's potential immunity could come under the aegis of the original proceedings.

It's also fairly obvious that every time this subject has come up for discussion, the participants have adhered to the ruling and have discussed, for example, the effects on the participants or the general social or moral implications, rather than discussion of '... the nature of, or decisions on, any matter of law...'

Aardvark · 05-06-2007, 12:39 PM

Thanks for that. I'm surprised that Petrina didn't check the ruling before commenting.

Petrina · 05-06-2007, 12:40 PM

I do see your point, but better safe than sorry .

Aardvark · 06-06-2007, 12:38 PM

The next question is 'where is the hearing of 16th July taking place?'

I am out of the country for a couple of nights so won't be able to travel. Presumably it will be in Chichester. Does anybody know?

Bellatrix · 06-06-2007, 01:02 PM

We understand it is in Portsmouth. However, there could be a delay because Mr Mote apparently is going before the European Parliament on the 11th June to ask for a further defence for immunity.

Aardvark · 06-06-2007, 05:03 PM

What a hypocrite!!!!! :evil:

Nobody is above the law. It's not fair. Local people round here who are accused of a lot less have to face the beak and can't hide behind an immunity they didn't enjoy at the time of the offence.

mkpdavies · 06-06-2007, 05:05 PM

Mote is an utter fool. I used to think he did a lot of good work, but his idocy, selfishness and hypocrisy now mean his name being associated to the anti-EU movement, does it more harm than good.

06-06-2007, 05:05 PM	#20 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,820	Mote is an utter fool. I used to think he did a lot of good work, but his idocy, selfishness and hypocrisy now mean his name being associated to the anti-EU movement, does it more harm than good. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

05-06-2007, 11:12 AM	#11 (permalink)
Aardvark Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Oxonia Posts: 3,928	Calm down guys, let's try to keep this thread on topic. :roll:

05-06-2007, 12:03 PM	#12 (permalink)
Petrina Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: sussex Posts: 1,034	I think you should all know that an injunction was issued by a High Court Judge on all reports in this country of any of the preliminary proceedings in Mote`s case . Perhaps the moderators on this forum would like to take this into account in relation to this thread .

05-06-2007, 12:25 PM	#13 (permalink)
Aardvark Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Oxonia Posts: 3,928	I have a copy of the injunction at home and its predecessor. The fact of the cases may be discussed. The fact of the charges may be discussed. Nobody here has produced any of the evidence, although oddly I do have some of it which you can have privately at some time after the case has commenced. Nobody is questioning Ashley Mote's innocence, we are dicussing completely separate issues, his claim for immunity and his desire to prevent publicity for the case. The fact of the matter is that AM has sought to use his position as MEP to seek immunity from prosecution when he has spent an inordinate amount fo time and effort condemning those who use the same immunity elsewhere - it's in his books for a start. I neither know nor care any more whether Mr Mote is innocent or not, what grieves me is the hypocrisy of someone who condemns the use of immunity, but tries to use it himself. The facts of the hearings published here are taken from open source material and, should you subscribe to the correct section on the europa.eu site, you can read the judgement referred to as it is available online for the entire world to see. The eis site also requires a subscription and indeed the material posted at the start of the thread came from a subscription only site, but every lawyer subscribed to those sites has access to the judgements. Law reports are not confidential, but are expensive to get copies of because of the cost of preparation, as you know Petrina. As I stated, AM assured me of his innocence (this was at the time I started working for him). I have not seen most of the evidence in the case so could not comment further. I do not know what the outcome of the case will be, but the issues of immunity and the attempt to prevent an open hearing will be hot topics. I believe firmly that our legal system should be open and fair and that nobody in any public position should be above the law. Surely I am allowed to discuss those concepts.

05-06-2007, 12:39 PM	#15 (permalink)
Aardvark Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Oxonia Posts: 3,928	Thanks for that. I'm surprised that Petrina didn't check the ruling before commenting.

05-06-2007, 12:40 PM	#16 (permalink)
Petrina Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: sussex Posts: 1,034	I do see your point, but better safe than sorry .

06-06-2007, 12:38 PM	#17 (permalink)
Aardvark Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Oxonia Posts: 3,928	The next question is 'where is the hearing of 16th July taking place?' I am out of the country for a couple of nights so won't be able to travel. Presumably it will be in Chichester. Does anybody know?

06-06-2007, 01:02 PM	#18 (permalink)
Bellatrix Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 625	We understand it is in Portsmouth. However, there could be a delay because Mr Mote apparently is going before the European Parliament on the 11th June to ask for a further defence for immunity.

06-06-2007, 05:03 PM	#19 (permalink)
Aardvark Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Oxonia Posts: 3,928	What a hypocrite!!!!! :evil: Nobody is above the law. It's not fair. Local people round here who are accused of a lot less have to face the beak and can't hide behind an immunity they didn't enjoy at the time of the offence.