Rules..for the many, or the few ?

[JohnfromUK]

8 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

The key question is WHY they want the seat in the first place?.

I think there are two motivators - and neither is "a desire to make the world a better place"

9 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

a £70K salary, loads of mega expenses, free taxis, loads of junkets and free food/ booze and answerable to nobody

This is certainly one in many cases, although some MPs (all parties, but more Tories) are wealthy independently.  Clegg (former liberal) is independently wealthy, as are Lady Nugee (Emily Thornbury), Starmer, Benn, Umuna, Margaret Hodge, Geoffrey Robinson, Kinnock for labour

I think simply 'power' is the other; being the 'rule makers' not the 'rule takers'.  A feeling of 'superiority' as the chosen representative sitting at the seat of 'power' in Westminster.

[Westley]

In my experience, it begins at local level and just gets more corrupt the higher they go. Worth noting that most are from the Legal Profession  !

[TIGHTCHOKE]

I forgot to mention that Fiona Onasanya hopes to be this country's first black Prime Minister!

 

Well she is going about it in a mighty odd way.

[Scully]

12 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

I forgot to mention that Fiona Onasanya hopes to be this country's first black Prime Minister!

 

Well she is going about it in a mighty odd way.

Nice to see that this case has now made nationwide prime time BBC news. 👍

[Rewulf]

53 minutes ago, Scully said:

Nice to see that this case has now made nationwide prime time BBC news. 👍

I think they tried to contain it as long as possible, been nearly 2 weeks now with a verdict today or tomorrow.

[JJsDad]

Her defence appears to be seeking sympathy from the jury:

     I am terribly ill. So ill in fact that I just couldnt answer all these awful Police Officers who questioned me.

     I was so busy answering all my emails and doing my duty as an elected MP.  I never knew I would have to work when I was elected, that confused me totally.

     I lend my car out to half the people I know, so I cant be expected to know who was driving it at any one time.

    If these points fail to convince you that I am wrongly accused and totally innocent; `My Bruv did it` !

I just hope the jury see`s through this utter rubbish and the Judge takes into account what this fiasco has cost the taxpayer. Being a cynic, I wont hold my breath.

[JohnfromUK]

IF you are sufficiently ill that you cannot correctly answer the basic legal correspondence that happens to anyone (not just a lawyer as she is) when you are accused of speeding, then you are in no fit state to be an MP representing constituents - as you would not be able to do that correctly either.

[JJsDad]

5 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

then you are in no fit state to be an MP representing constituents - as you would not be able to do that correctly either.

Providing we have a jury who can see through this utter rubbish of a defence there well may be a need for a bye-election !

[Gordon R]

I love the way she "trusted" her brother to fill it in - or anyone else who noticed the opened envelope - opening it and taking it upon themselves to fill in a form addressed to her. She left no instructions with the form - just left people to figure it out on their own - a feat she was unable to accomplish. Did she never wonder who signed the form, addressed to her? She had previously filled one in the month before. I assume her training as a solicitor didn't prepare her for the need to fill form in herself.

It is truly pathetic. I would love to be the Prosecution Barrister today - shooting fish in a barrel.

[JohnfromUK]

2 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

shooting fish in a barrel.

Don't bank on it - MP's are more like eels - slippery.

[old man]

This decision could finally define for me the fitness for purpose of our legal system.

[Gordon R]

old man - my feelings exactly. I cannot comprehend that a jury exists who could get this wrong.

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, JJsDad said:

Her defence appears to be seeking sympathy from the jury:

     I am terribly ill. So ill in fact that I just couldnt answer all these awful Police Officers who questioned me.
If fact I think there may have been a racist element to this .

     I was so busy answering all my emails and doing my duty as an elected MP.  I never knew I would have to work when I was elected, that confused me totally.
Despite the fact that somehow I qualified as a solicitor, Im going to play the dumb card .

     I lend my car out to half the people I know, so I cant be expected to know who was driving it at any one time.
Whether they are insured in it or not, even random Russians I barely know.

    If these points fail to convince you that I am wrongly accused and totally innocent; `My Bruv did it` !
Im an MP , Im claiming diplomatic immunity !😂

I just hope the jury see`s through this utter rubbish and the Judge takes into account what this fiasco has cost the taxpayer. Being a cynic, I wont hold my breath.
I wont either !

 

43 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

. I assume her training as a solicitor didn't prepare her for the need to fill form in herself.

The mind boggles at  how she managed to qualify, and her rather foolish attempt to swerve a speeding fine and points, which she could clearly afford , shows the level of contempt she possess's for law.

40 minutes ago, old man said:

This decision could finally define for me the fitness for purpose of our legal system.

My opinion on it went south a long time ago.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Well it could all be over this afternoon, unless of course she pulls another twist!

[Rewulf]

33 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Well it could all be over this afternoon, unless of course she pulls another twist!

Im following it from the Old Bailey website, they keep stopping and starting this morning (stalling) no where near done yet.
Then jury has to go out and consider.
Highly unlikely its done today.

Edit ,this mornings issues were caused by an ill juror

https://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/crime/peterborough-mp-fiona-onasanya-did-not-know-who-was-driving-when-her-car-was-caught-speeding-1-8712333

Probably sick of hearing all the BS 😄

Edited November 20, 2018 by Rewulf

[old man]

Interesting to know what her insurers make of that scenario?

[TIGHTCHOKE]

I wonder how long she will drag it out for?

Her brother will not be sentenced until her case is finished.

 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Latest article from the Guardian;

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/20/labour-mp-fiona-onasanya-old-bailey-court-speeding-nissan

 

Labour MP tells court she doesn't know who drove speeding Nissan

Fiona Onasanya accused in court of colluding with brother over speeding ticket

Rajeev Syal

 

 

Still, taken from a speed camera, of Labour MP Fiona Onasanya’s Nissan Micra being caught speeding in July last year. Photograph: CPS/P. A Labour MP facing allegations of deliberately misleading the police over a speeding ticket has been accused in court of colluding with her brother to protect her political career.Fiona Onasanya, MP for Peterborough, repeatedly told untruths to avoid a speeding ticket and refused to answer questions from the police to avoid incriminating either herself or her brother Festus, the prosecution alleged.Under cross-examination at the Old Bailey, she denied that her brother had pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice a week before the trial to protect her political career.David Jeremy QC, prosecuting, told the MP: “For you, the truth comes a very distant second to your personal ambition.”Festus Onasanya, 33, admitted three counts of perverting the course of justice a week before he was due to face trial. Fiona Onasanya, a solicitor, has denied perverting the course of justice.A notice of intended prosecution (NIP) form sent to the MP after the speeding offence was returned with Aleks Antipow named on the official forms as being behind the wheel.Antipow previously lived in Chesterton, Cambridge, at a house rented by Onasanya and her brother, the court heard. The prosecution claims that he was at home with his parents in Russia at the time of the incident.Onasanya told the jury that it was likely that her brother filled in the NIP form that she received in the post in August 2017. She claimed that at no point had she asked her brother, with whom she attends church weekly, if he had filled in the form.Asked about her relationship now with her brother, Onasanya said: “It is a bit strained.”Jeremy said that given that his decision to fill in the form had led to the current trial, their relationship would be considerably worse “if your story was even close to the truth”. “Is everything you said true or have you lied or concocted a series of lies?” he asked. Onasanya denied lying.Asked about her interview under caution by police officers in January and why she had refused to answer any questions from officers such as who was driving or who filled in the form, Onasanya said: “I was bamboozled with lots of questions. They said I had six months before any further action and they would be in touch.”Jeremy said: “You did not answer those questions because you didn’t have any answers that would not have incriminated either you or Festus.” Onasanya denied this.Onasanya has told the court that she did not read the NIP form in its entirety because once she had read the date of the offence, she was convinced that she had been in Westminster at the time.It was put to Onasanya that if her version of events was correct, her brother had set her up by filling in the form and not telling her, leading to the current trial. Onasanya replied: “Yes.”Onasanya told the court that she could not remember where she was or what she had done on the day the offence took place.Nine days after the offence, when she received the NIP form, she said she had just left it for her mother or brother to deal with because she assumed that parliament was sitting and she was therefore likely to have been in Peterborough. She now concedes that her recollection was wrong.Jeremy asked who was driving the car that day. Onasanya said: “I don’t know. Both my brother and my mother have access to my vehicle. I have aunts, friends and family that I allow to use the car when I am in parliament.”Onasanya admitted failing to ask either her brother or mother if they were driving the Nissan Micra when it was caught speeding. “Aren’t you curious to know who was driving your car? You are an MP, a graduate and a solicitor,” Jeremy said.Jeremy then asked: “You don’t eliminate yourself?” She replied: “No.”The trial continues.

 

[Newbie to this]

11 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Latest article from the Guardian;

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/20/labour-mp-fiona-onasanya-old-bailey-court-speeding-nissan

 

Labour MP tells court she doesn't know who drove speeding Nissan

Fiona Onasanya accused in court of colluding with brother over speeding ticket

Rajeev Syal

 

 

 

Still, taken from a speed camera, of Labour MP Fiona Onasanya’s Nissan Micra being caught speeding in July last year. Photograph: CPS/P. A Labour MP facing allegations of deliberately misleading the police over a speeding ticket has been accused in court of colluding with her brother to protect her political career.Fiona Onasanya, MP for Peterborough, repeatedly told untruths to avoid a speeding ticket and refused to answer questions from the police to avoid incriminating either herself or her brother Festus, the prosecution alleged.Under cross-examination at the Old Bailey, she denied that her brother had pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice a week before the trial to protect her political career.David Jeremy QC, prosecuting, told the MP: “For you, the truth comes a very distant second to your personal ambition.”Festus Onasanya, 33, admitted three counts of perverting the course of justice a week before he was due to face trial. Fiona Onasanya, a solicitor, has denied perverting the course of justice.A notice of intended prosecution (NIP) form sent to the MP after the speeding offence was returned with Aleks Antipow named on the official forms as being behind the wheel.Antipow previously lived in Chesterton, Cambridge, at a house rented by Onasanya and her brother, the court heard. The prosecution claims that he was at home with his parents in Russia at the time of the incident.Onasanya told the jury that it was likely that her brother filled in the NIP form that she received in the post in August 2017. She claimed that at no point had she asked her brother, with whom she attends church weekly, if he had filled in the form.Asked about her relationship now with her brother, Onasanya said: “It is a bit strained.”Jeremy said that given that his decision to fill in the form had led to the current trial, their relationship would be considerably worse “if your story was even close to the truth”. “Is everything you said true or have you lied or concocted a series of lies?” he asked. Onasanya denied lying.Asked about her interview under caution by police officers in January and why she had refused to answer any questions from officers such as who was driving or who filled in the form, Onasanya said: “I was bamboozled with lots of questions. They said I had six months before any further action and they would be in touch.”Jeremy said: “You did not answer those questions because you didn’t have any answers that would not have incriminated either you or Festus.” Onasanya denied this.Onasanya has told the court that she did not read the NIP form in its entirety because once she had read the date of the offence, she was convinced that she had been in Westminster at the time.It was put to Onasanya that if her version of events was correct, her brother had set her up by filling in the form and not telling her, leading to the current trial. Onasanya replied: “Yes.”Onasanya told the court that she could not remember where she was or what she had done on the day the offence took place.Nine days after the offence, when she received the NIP form, she said she had just left it for her mother or brother to deal with because she assumed that parliament was sitting and she was therefore likely to have been in Peterborough. She now concedes that her recollection was wrong.Jeremy asked who was driving the car that day. Onasanya said: “I don’t know. Both my brother and my mother have access to my vehicle. I have aunts, friends and family that I allow to use the car when I am in parliament.”Onasanya admitted failing to ask either her brother or mother if they were driving the Nissan Micra when it was caught speeding. “Aren’t you curious to know who was driving your car? You are an MP, a graduate and a solicitor,” Jeremy said.Jeremy then asked: “You don’t eliminate yourself?” She replied: “No.”The trial continues.

 

 

 

Still, taken from a speed camera, of Labour MP Fiona Onasanya’s Nissan Micra being caught speeding in July last year. Photograph: CPS/P. A Labour MP facing allegations of deliberately misleading the police over a speeding ticket has been accused in court of colluding with her brother to protect her political career.Fiona Onasanya, MP for Peterborough, repeatedly told untruths to avoid a speeding ticket and refused to answer questions from the police to avoid incriminating either herself or her brother Festus, the prosecution alleged.Under cross-examination at the Old Bailey, she denied that her brother had pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice a week before the trial to protect her political career.David Jeremy QC, prosecuting, told the MP: “For you, the truth comes a very distant second to your personal ambition.”Festus Onasanya, 33, admitted three counts of perverting the course of justice a week before he was due to face trial. Fiona Onasanya, a solicitor, has denied perverting the course of justice.A notice of intended prosecution (NIP) form sent to the MP after the speeding offence was returned with Aleks Antipow named on the official forms as being behind the wheel.Antipow previously lived in Chesterton, Cambridge, at a house rented by Onasanya and her brother, the court heard. The prosecution claims that he was at home with his parents in Russia at the time of the incident.Onasanya told the jury that it was likely that her brother filled in the NIP form that she received in the post in August 2017. She claimed that at no point had she asked her brother, with whom she attends church weekly, if he had filled in the form.Asked about her relationship now with her brother, Onasanya said: “It is a bit strained.”Jeremy said that given that his decision to fill in the form had led to the current trial, their relationship would be considerably worse “if your story was even close to the truth”. “Is everything you said true or have you lied or concocted a series of lies?” he asked. Onasanya denied lying.Asked about her interview under caution by police officers in January and why she had refused to answer any questions from officers such as who was driving or who filled in the form, Onasanya said: “I was bamboozled with lots of questions. They said I had six months before any further action and they would be in touch.”Jeremy said: “You did not answer those questions because you didn’t have any answers that would not have incriminated either you or Festus.” Onasanya denied this.Onasanya has told the court that she did not read the NIP form in its entirety because once she had read the date of the offence, she was convinced that she had been in Westminster at the time.It was put to Onasanya that if her version of events was correct, her brother had set her up by filling in the form and not telling her, leading to the current trial. Onasanya replied: “Yes.”Onasanya told the court that she could not remember where she was or what she had done on the day the offence took place.Nine days after the offence, when she received the NIP form, she said she had just left it for her mother or brother to deal with because she assumed that parliament was sitting and she was therefore likely to have been in Peterborough. She now concedes that her recollection was wrong.Jeremy asked who was driving the car that day. Onasanya said: “I don’t know. Both my brother and my mother have access to my vehicle. I have aunts, friends and family that I allow to use the car when I am in parliament.”Onasanya admitted failing to ask either her brother or mother if they were driving the Nissan Micra when it was caught speeding. “Aren’t you curious to know who was driving your car? You are an MP, a graduate and a solicitor,” Jeremy said.Jeremy then asked: “You don’t eliminate yourself?” She replied: “No.”The trial continues.

 

 

 

What did I tell you, She is trying to place the blame squarely on Her Brother. 

[panoma1]

I wonder if she supplied medical evidence to the court in order substantiate her claim to have been ill? Or is she just playing a convenient sickness card? like some defendants play a convenient race card?

[Rewulf]

21 hours ago, Newbie to this said:

What did I tell you, She is trying to place the blame squarely on Her Brother. 

Should get a  verdict tomorrow, all evidence submitted, and summed up.

In a closing speech, her lawyer Christine Agnew QC heaped blame onto Festus, describing him as a “charming chancer”. When they went together to be interviewed by police, he was “banking” on her status as a solicitor and MP to get him “out of the hole”, jurors were told.

Ms Agnew said: “He is a chancer and he is a dishonest chancer. He is somebody who will manipulate anyone to get out of a hole. If he was driving that is exactly the motivation that would be required to fill that form out wrong.” She suggested Festus filled in the form as he had done it before and “he thought he could get away with it”. He already had nine points on his licence and risked disqualification, and his job as a delivery driver, she said. Ms Agnew said Ms Onasanya was not a woman who “lies, lies and lies again” as the prosecution claim.

She added: “What’s she guilty of? She’s guilty of not completing the NIP properly. She’s guilty of not asking her brother as many questions as she should have done. “You cannot choose your family, ladies and gentlemen. That’s a trite comment but she had no reason to suspect him and she had no reason to disbelieve him. “Why would she put everything at risk for three penalty points.”

Yet she knew he had lied on a NIP 3 times before ?

Its funny how she didnt tell the police any of this when interviewed, whats that thing they say when they arrest you

'You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court.

Earlier, Opposition chief whip Nicholas Brown spoke up for Onasanya, describing her as honest and trustworthy. In a character witness statement read out in court, the MP said his colleague was “a decent, outgoing character” who was committed to her work in her constituency and as a Parliamentarian. He said: “She is a person of strong personal beliefs rooted in her religious faith. “I judge her to be honest, trustworthy and reliable.”

Well, if a labour politician says so it must be true 😂
 

 

[JohnfromUK]

26 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Ms Agnew said: “He is a chancer and he is a dishonest chancer.

It was the 'dishonest' brother who pleaded guilty?  I see nothing either 'chancer' or 'dishonest' in pleading guilty.

 

27 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Earlier, Opposition chief whip Nicholas Brown spoke up for Onasanya, describing her as honest and trustworthy.

Perhaps he should be next in court - charge - lying on oath.

29 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Well, if a labour politician says so it must be true

If his lips are moving - he's lying

[TIGHTCHOKE]

I await tomorrows verdict with great interest!

[Rewulf]

Just now, TIGHTCHOKE said:

I await tomorrows verdict with great interest!

Unless we are talking a total denial of justice (not impossible in this country) the verdict should be a no brainer.
Its the sentencing Im interested in.
If you or me went down this foolhardy route, took it to crown court and continued to perjure ourselves, I would be expecting somewhere between a 1 and 2 year sentence if found guilty.
There are precedents set for this, but I think she will not get anything like that, I see a suspended coming personally.
On conviction she should resign really, but I dont think she' ll do that either , without a push.

[Newbie to this]

So have they established that it was her driving the car or are they accepting that She can't remember.

If so will they amend the NIP and add a can't remember check box!

I can't see how Her defence of ignorance can wash, She is a trained legal professional, She should never be in ignorance of the law.

I've never had a NIP or any legal training, but even I know it is the registered keepers responsibility to fill it out truthfully.

 

Edit- My guess is She gets nothing and Her Brother get all the blame.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Newbie to this