Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Tiger, please


Governments are not just the few politicians who make headlines. Tens of thousands of honest and often very well intentioned citizens work very hard to make Government function for us. They're not aligned to a political party but they do have to try and implement the politicians decisions.


Those politicians can do things which seem, or are actually are dodgy, which can make it seem that Government as a whole is a bit iffy. It's not. And if you want to go down that line of argument one should back it up with facts.


ap

While TJ may have been stupid not to enquire where such a large sum of money suddenly came from - and to have signed a mortgage for such a large sum, likewise - I still have no confirmation that she returned the money once she did know.


Has she returned the money? (or donated it to charity if it cannot be returned?). Because if not, she continues to benefit, substantially, from what has been deemed a crime in a court of law. It really is irrrelevant whether the crime is bank robbery or corruption. I'd love to hear that she has in fact returned the money to whence it came.

Good question Lousiana!


Although I guess it's quite an difficult area? Imagine, for example, that you worked in a pub and served someone who was underage - would you have to hand your salary back because you did something illegal while you were employed?


If it was proceeds from criminal activity then that's one thing, but if it was a salary performed for activities that were later found to be in breach of the law, I don't know how the courts would be able to address it.


Interesting!

Money laundering is one of thoses rare aspects of the law where you are put in a positon where you have to justify your actions, as opposed to someone having to prove that you were naughty - the usual "no comment " responses do you no favors at all in this area - guilty unless you can prove otherwise


This extends to anyone who has been in contact with the funds- if they should have resonably had an inkling of suspicion about the odd origin of the funds, then they have committed a crime by not reporting it. It doesnt matter whethetr they were expressly aware of any wrongdoing, if they are in a positon whereby they should have asked questions, then they are in trouble


Taking this onto consideration, the picture may seem somewhat different


" Hello dear, Im home"


"Good day at the offce? "


Yes, I got an unexpected & completley out of character ?400K bonus, tax free today and Im not even a hedge fund owner - shall we pay off the mortgage ?"


Ooh, well done- yes, lets do that - fancy opooing a bottle of champers ?"


"rather"



Policicians and rich corporate lawyers come a close second to coppers and hippies in the Snorky dont trust rankings.Give me a decent Banker/ trader any day - at least you know what you are getting and what their motivation is


TJ out. on her spotty arse. now.

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Good question Lousiana!

>

> Although I guess it's quite an difficult area?

> Imagine, for example, that you worked in a pub and

> served someone who was underage - would you have

> to hand your salary back because you did something

> illegal while you were employed?


Your example is a red herring.


TJ was not an employee, nor did she receive the dosh 'in the course of her duties', 'whilst performing her duties' or as part of running a business as either employee or employer, however defined.


Mr TJ came home with a wad of readies or equivalent, the proceeds of a crime but seemingly from an unnamed source, and she pocketed it. And it remains in her pocket, AFAIK. I would like to hear otherwise.


If your brother defrauded a bank, and handed the money to you for safekeeping, and he was found out, would you really expect to keep your hands on the money?



>

> If it was proceeds from criminal activity then

> that's one thing, but if it was a salary performed

> for activities that were later found to be in

> breach of the law, I don't know how the courts

> would be able to address it.

>

> Interesting!

SteveT


Many thanks for your fan-dom. When it comes to white-collar crime, I hope to be always on the ball, as it were.


We have a specialised govt. unit tasked with (urgh! what an expression. But I'll use it anyway) recovering the proceeds of crime. And there are some very clear and public proceeds right there in TJ's pocket. This 'loyal' (I quote The Observer profile yesterday) public servant is perhaps a little too loyal to her bank balance. Everyone talks about what happened, but nobody asks her to hand over the substantial dosh. I find this quite remarkable. If we fail to do anything about it, the buggers will keep doing the same old thing. Upholding standards in public life is about just that: actually upholding each standard, and calling on people to account. I have little time for the Italian political and judicial systems, but they seem to be doing more in this case than we are.

Louisiana, you continue to refer to this situation as if it were a money-laundering crime committed by TJ, when an investigation has found that no such crime has taken place. This defies logic. Your agenda is tainted, and your opinion is soiled.


"Mr TJ came home with a wad of readies or equivalent, the proceeds of a crime but seemingly from an unnamed source, and she pocketed it. And it remains in her pocket, AFAIK."


'AFAIK'??? You don't know any of this. It's a smear, it's defamatory and unsupported. It's shameful. She's been investigated, and found innocent of any such crime. You're peddling the politics of the gutter.


If you know something that the investigators don't know then you should go to the relevant authorities with my full support. I don't think you do.


"I would like to hear otherwise."


In other words guilty until proven innocent? Your prejudice betrays you and undermines your credibility. You have no intention of hearing otherwise - you've got you're fingers in your ears and you're going 'la la la hate'.


This is ridiculous, a witch hunt.

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Louisiana, you continue to refer to this situation

> as if it were a money-laundering crime committed

> by TJ, when an investigation has found that no

> such crime has taken place. This defies logic.

> Your agenda is tainted, and your opinion is

> soiled.

>

> "Mr TJ came home with a wad of readies or

> equivalent, the proceeds of a crime but seemingly

> from an unnamed source, and she pocketed it. And

> it remains in her pocket, AFAIK."

>

> 'AFAIK'??? You don't know any of this. It's a

> smear, it's defamatory and unsupported. It's

> shameful. She's been investigated, and found

> innocent of any such crime. You're peddling the

> politics of the gutter.

>

> If you know something that the investigators don't

> know then you should go to the relevant

> authorities with my full support. I don't think

> you do.

>

> "I would like to hear otherwise."

>

> In other words guilty until proven innocent? Your

> prejudice betrays you and undermines your

> credibility. You have no intention of hearing

> otherwise - you've got you're fingers in your ears

> and you're going 'la la la hate'.

>

> This is ridiculous, a witch hunt.


Hugey


In Money laundering, you are indeed guilty unless you can prove beyond a shred of doubt that you are not culpable

My case exactly. If what you say is true, and the money has been identified to the extent necessary by law, then the money will have gone, and TJ will be bang to rights.


If it hasn't, and the burden of proof is so low, then she ain't guilty.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • What was he doing on the stage at Glastonbury? Or on the stage at the other concert in Finsbury Park? Grinning like a Cheshire cat whilst pissed and stoned 20 somethings on the promise of free internet sung-- Oh Jeremy Corbyn---  What were his policies for Northern mining towns with no jobs or infrastructure? Free Internet and university places for youngsters. What were his other manifesto pledges? Why all the ambiguity over Brexit?  I didn't like Thatcher, Blair or May or Tony but I respected them as politicians because they stood by what they believed in. I respect all politicians across the board that stick to their principles. Corbyn didn't and its why he got  annihilated at the polls. A socialist, anti imperialist and anti capitalist that said he voted for an imperialist and pro capitalist cabal. He refused to say how he'd vote over and over again until the last knockings. He did so to appease the Islington elite and middle class students he was courting. The same people that were screaming that Brexit was racist. At the same time the EU were holding black and Asian immigrants in refugee camps overseas but not a word on that! Corbyn created and courted a student union protest movement that screamed at and shouted down anyone not on the left . They claimed Starmer and the centre right of labour were tories. He didn't get elected  because he, his movement and policies were unelectable, twice. He turned out not to have the convictions of his politics and died on his own sword.    Reform won't win an election. All the idiots that voted for them to keep out Labour actually enabled Labour. They'll be back voting tory next time.    Farage wouldn't be able to make his millions if he was in power. He's a very devious shyster but I very much doubt he'd actually want the responsibility that governance requires.
    • The purge of hard left members that were part of Corbyn's, Mcdonnel's and Lansmans momentum that purged the party of right wing and centrist members. That's politics. It's what Blair did to win, its what Starmer had to do to win. This country doesn't vote in extreme left or right governments. That's partly why Corbyn lost  We're pretty much a centrist bunch.  It doesn't make it false either. It's an opinion based on the voting patterns, demography and statistics. Can you explain then why former mining constituencies that despise the tories voted for them or abstained rather than vote for Corbyns Labour?  What is the truth then? But he never got elected!!! Why? He should have been binned off there and then. Why he was allowed to hang about is an outrage. I hold him party responsible for the shit show that we've had to endure since. 
    • Depends on what the Barista says doesnt it? There was no physical confrontation with the driver, OP thinks she is being targetted when she isnt. These guys work min wage under strict schedules so give them a break unless they damage your stuff
    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...