Re: 'Arry does a Doddy : Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:08 pm  

cod'ead wrote: Makes you think what he'd be worth if he did have some business acumen Or maybe he's not quite as daft as he'd like to make us believe? You know, the trouble with some people is that they can't lay low even if they tried - rather than buying a huge house on one of the most expensive pieces of land in the world which will require a small fortune to keep in that location he could have bought a more modest but still very nice four or five bed house in a decent neighbourhood and stuffed his mattresses with ten pound notes and then stuck two fingers up at everyone for the rest of his life. I am coming to learn that my old dad was right in all of these matters all along.

cod'ead wrote: Makes you think what he'd be worth if he did have some business acumen Or maybe he's not quite as daft as he'd like to make us believe? You know, the trouble with some people is that they can't lay low even if they tried - rather than buying a huge house on one of the most expensive pieces of land in the world which will require a small fortune to keep in that location he could have bought a more modest but still very nice four or five bed house in a decent neighbourhood and stuffed his mattresses with ten pound notes and then stuck two fingers up at everyone for the rest of his life. I am coming to learn that my old dad was right in all of these matters all along.

Re: 'Arry does a Doddy : Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:14 pm  

Re: 'Arry does a Doddy : Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:15 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Who knows what happened in the jury room at Redknapp's trial, but if for example a jury perceived what they regarded as a basically good bloke, who does indisputably pay millions in taxes, being scapegoated or oppressed over a (comparatively) modest amount of tax, when they see bankers stealing billions, and companies like Vodafone getting unjustifiable sweetheart deals, then I personally would understand that. Redknapp should be a long way down the list for prosecution. The likes of Vodafone, Goodwin et al , some jurors might argue, surely get their collars felt first and examined as to whether what they or their companies have been up to is or is not criminal conduct.

Well said. I'd also add that if what they're doing isn't criminal conduct, the law ought to be changed so that it becomes criminal conduct.

Re: 'Arry does a Doddy : Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:20 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

Well said. I'd also add that if what they're doing isn't criminal conduct, the law ought to be changed so that it becomes criminal conduct.

You are aware that right now, there'll be some wonk in the Justice Department, beavering away on new legislation to make it a criminal offence for jurors to acquit

Re: 'Arry does a Doddy : Thu Feb 09, 2012 5:59 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

You are aware that right now, there'll be some wonk in the Justice Department, beavering away on new legislation to make it a criminal offence for jurors to acquit

And about time too, they should be charged with wasting police time if they acquit. These layabouts on juries should get themselves a proper job. A spell in the army would do them good.