Ladymuck

SteveT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > She's digging the alotment, for some light relief. *collapses laughing* actually you are not far wrong!!! When one has been married as long as I have...V-day is just another day. Having said that, I may well be going out on the piss in the evening with Monica, hubby and some others and anyone else who wants to tag along for a laugh! Oh SteveT...how I have missed your cheekiness of late...relieved to see you remain on good form though. x

HAL9000 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Quite! That usage seems to have dropped out of > fashion these days but you're not the only one who > remembers the old plate. Jesus, Mary and Joseph!

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...romance isn't dead *curled up laughing* So funny ???? *still laughing*

katie1997 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sorry if this sounds like a stupid question but > can we donate to the forum at the drinks Georgia?? > Not sure what to expect but I will love to be > there, sounds like fun :))Cheers k xx I don't think it's a stupid question...in fact I suspect Admin would be quite touched. And as for the drinks...they are fun! Look forward to seeing you.

hibbs Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Don't go changing Sean! > > x hibbs is right.

themaninblack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It may well be technically interest free, but you > can bet your backside it won't be free of charges... >...They are all > sharking after your money no matter what word they > use to describe the payments. Cynical but spot on I suspect. *laughs heartily*

Thank you georgia.

Declan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Puppy Love,Woof? Or Long Haired Lover From Liverpool?

reggie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > God I love those latin terms, you is some Lady. Innit! Me dont talk Latin always dough, juss wen me wanna look clevver like in de drawing room... no wot I mean? Hey you is dat cool dude innit...respekk! Ahem...better get back on topic...have tried to google the Law Report without success, anyone out there who can assist? Presumably the case name would be R v Miah?

Bluerevolution Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg164/Seago_buc > ket/witch-hunt.jpg I'm guessing you are the one in the middle Bluerevolution?

Roll Deep Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do you write for the Daily Mail, Ian? *bursts out laughing*

DELETED DUE TO REALISATION THAT POSTER'S DETAILS COULD BE ACCESSED BY THE SEARCH FACILITY - SORRY FOLKS

17.12 (pm is superfluous Woof - 24 hour clock!) Normally? And now? STOP PS: I am not impressed with your lack of hygiene in the kitchen...shouldn't you and your trainee sous-chef be wearing some sort of headwear in order to prevent the odd hair/fur from falling into dish? http://www.youtube.com/user/cookingwithdog

woofmarkthedog Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 1:45 pm > > Oven warming well STOP > > Considering dumplings instead of pie STOP > > No, pie definitely winning STOP Definitely pie for me please STOP I trust your pastry is home-made STOP

silverfox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Like most people I haven't read the whole case > review and judgment... > Note that Cherie Blair has made the point that > Shamso Miah is religious twice. This suggests her > words were more than what lawyers refer to as > obiter dicta... Interesting silverfox. I took CB's words as being the ratio decidendi, i.e. the reason for the decision. If then, as you seem to think, those comments are merely obiter dicta, what then was the ratio decidendi? Has anyone seen the law report on this case?

Declan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- >...this man should have had a > longer sentence. Clearly this is a matter for debate and certainly this would in all probability be the view of the victim and his supporters. However, as alluded to above, sentencers are under a duty to proceed with caution before dishing out a custodial sentence. This is a very unusual reason to > reduce a sentence. It actually isn't that unusual in the sense that it comes under the general umbrella of "good character" which, amongst other things, includes factors like regular church attendance (or in this case mosque attendance?), or being "devout" etc. >...what would have happened if he had > shot the person... Again it would depend on all of the facts of the case, but (without reading through the various Criminal Justice Acts and their amendments and the case in its entirety), my guess is that the use of a firearm would probably have been cited as an aggravating factor by the prosecution.

Sean, I can see why this is causing you some frustration: on the face of it, the justice system has "gone soft" on yet another criminal. However, I believe that SimonM has hit the nail on the head when he says: "she has done nothing other than follow the rules on sentencing". I have not read the case in its entirety (only extracts from the media), but I suspect that Cherie Booth was unable to rely on a defence for her client. This would have left her with little option but to look to mitigating factors as a way of securing a reduced sentence for Mr. Miah (her client). Here she has utilised personal mitigation factors in that the mitigating factors are linked to the criminal as opposed to the crime - all perfectly permissible under the Criminal Justice Act. She suspends his sentence for two years based on the fact that he is "a religious person" and has "not been in trouble before". I.e. the reason for her decision is not based solely on the fact that Mr. Miah is "devout" but also because he is basically a man of good character with no previous criminal record (or as reggie put it: "normally a good bloke"). Yes, the sentence does appear lenient but I suppose the judges have the difficult and unenviable task of balancing severity of sentences with attempting to keep the prison population down. Not easy in my view. As for the suggestion that an atheist might be given a harsher sentence than a religious offender I don't think this could be taken seriously. I have no doubt that had Mr. Miah been an atheist that another set of mitigating factors would have been tailored to his situation; the list is relatively broad...financial worries, his age, intellectual limitations etc. etc. However, I suspect this case has been grabbed by the press so willingly precisely because of the fact that this man is religious - in this case muslim. After all, dozens of cases involving assaults and reduced sentences go through our justice system every day but they are less juicy in detail and therefore go unreported by the media. There and again, we could all adopt the rather cynical view of one reporter who said "maybe she's hoping that this will set a precedent, so that when her husband appears before a judge he will be able to put his religion to good use. I can imagine it now, five life sentences, suspended for a period of one year."!!! As ???? put it: "...a bit storm in a tea cup.

brum Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do you mean me?? Well what do YOU think piglet? I suppose I did eat quite a > few.... however in my defence the bowl was placed > on the table right in front of me!! How could a > food dustbin such as myself resist??! Oink Oink xx

PeckhamRose Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- Hope > you all had a nice time last night. We did - you should have come PR...in fact one forumite thought I might be you!!! Fancy that eh?

karter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- My question still has not > been answered, Poor old karter...you must feel neglected...must be the third (?) time you have mentioned it? Don't suppose someone from the Admin Team could answer karter's question. I wouldn't mind knowing the answer either. Thank you in advance. xx

daizie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well me you and another few were thrown out and > the gates shut . Yes...I remember it well! *sniggers*

brum Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...and the food was fab too.... well I never got to eat any of the chips cos some piglet stuffed them all!;-)

KalamityKel Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A pleasent evening. Yes it was another of those fabulous evenings...I had such fun and so many laughs with the other 3 musketeers (daizie, KK, and Mon). Brum and Karter, it is always a joy having you around. HAL9000 it was so so good to see you again after all these months...please don't leave it so long next time...and apologies to everyone if I neglected you owing to "catching up" with the Computer. Your guest was an absolute delight too. I do hope he had a pleasant evening and that he comes again. Lovely (actually that word is inadequate, but pea brain struggling at present) to see some of the familiar faces such as ????, Georgia, Raj, Sean, Sue and great to meet some new people such as alleycat and floatingonion, zaraband, geo and all those lurkers...nice to meet you all too. Fabulous seeing Marilyn and Ben too...Ben thanks for the drinks, twas exceedingly generous of you. Apologies if I've left anyone out - it happens at my age! >>Shame the behaviour of some >> spoilt it a little. > LM - I can get ya his number if you like ;-) As KK said, shame about the behaviour of some. Thankfully it was towards the end. And KK, I think I'll decline your...ahem...offer!;-) Ooops, edited to say...nice to see you again Bob and Val (phew!). Oooops, edited again to say thank you to Georgia for arranging...and those nibbles...mmmmmm...especially those prawns...delish! Which reminds me...brum - you didn't save me any chips you piglet!!! OK, this is becoming embarrassing now...edited a third time due to incompetence and stupidity. Fourth edit: just remembered Andy the Lurker...nice to meet you (PeckhamRose...Andy thought I might be you for some reason!). Oh dear, fifth edit: nice to meet anotherPaul too.

karter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I remember me and daizie abandoning you in the > boho, we abandoned you damnit, but you have the > fourth musketeer turning up tonight, so escort you > need not... > > edited to say daizie did NOT abandon you, she just > had to 'go'... Hang on a minute...who said anything about daizie abandoning? You were my appointed escort! But..who is the fourth musketeer? Don't tell me it's.................is she coming? oooh, the excitement. *suddenly realises the time*

karter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LadyM, yes, you should go tonight and try one of > those cock-tails. It's all very jolly talking about cocktails etc., but my escort will now not be escorting...will he karter? Do you remember what happened the last occasion you abandoned me (in Boho?).;-) Still, not to worry, I hear that the Three Musketeers will be in attendance tonight (or rather the Three Musketeers' Wives)...