Cummings in the soup?

[WalkedUp]

6 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Cummings has bent the rules, in my book, just like Stephen Kinnock and thousands of others, who crowd the beaches and beauty spots. The difference is that he has Johnson's ear and feared by many. 

I am not defending Cummings, but this is still a witch hunt, which he has survived so far. He hasn't cosied up to terrorists, evaded a speeding ticket, made racist remarks, isn't anti-semitic or falsely claimed expenses. The crisis would be far safer in Labour's squeaky clean hands.

Labour are toxic, really is a dearth of real leaders and big beasts across all parties now. Cummins did not bend the isolation rules, he deliberately broke them. The lockdown rules are one thing, it is the isolation that is paramount. 

I’m going to sign out now and catch up on some old Fieldsports Britain episodes. Too angry to even think let alone sleep. Good night all and stay safe, no matter what side of the argument you are on 👍

Edited May 24, 2020 by WalkedUp

[Gordon R]

Quote

Cummins did not bend the isolation rules, he deliberately broke them.

Not according to the published rules - see post from gingercat.

[AVB]

10 minutes ago, WalkedUp said:

AVB, that’s the general lockdown rules. It’s the enforced isolation if you or your household have CV that I am concerned with. 

I don’t think there are specific laws relating to this other than. 
 

Powers to direct or remove persons to a place suitable for screening and assessment

6(1)This paragraph applies if, during a transmission control period, a public health officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that a person in England is potentially infectious.

(2)The public health officer may, subject to sub-paragraph (3)—

(a)direct the person to go immediately to a place specified in the direction which is suitable for screening and assessment,

(b)remove the person to a place suitable for screening and assessment, or

(c)request a constable to remove the person to a place suitable for screening and assessment (and the constable may then do so).

(3)A public health officer may exercise the powers conferred by this paragraph in relation to a person only if the officer considers that it is necessary and proportionate to do so—

(a)in the interests of the person,

(b)for the protection of other people, or

(c)for the maintenance of public health.

(4)Where a public health officer exercises the powers conferred by this paragraph, the officer must inform that person—

(a)of the reason for directing or removing them, and

(b)that it is an offence—

(i)in a case where a person is directed, to fail without reasonable excuse to comply with the direction, or

(ii)in a case where a person is removed (by the officer or by a constable), to abscond.

And as the police didn’t do any of the above I assume they were happy with the situation. 

[oowee]

Looks like even the science panel that provides the basis of the lockdown restrictions are coming out against his actions. 

[WalkedUp]

There is a fantastic article by Alex Massie in the Spectator which pretty much sums up my feelings. 

8 hours ago, Gordon R said:

Not according to the published rules - see post from gingercat.

His post related to lockdown, not the control of infectious people - I.e. isolation. 

[WalkedUp]

Direct from gov.uk with my emphasis someone could source the relevant legislation:

If you live with others and you or one of them have symptoms that may be caused by coronavirus (COVID-19), then household members must stay at home and not leave your house for 14 days.

[WalkedUp]

It was his mother’s birthday the day he went to Durham, and his wife’s birthday the day he went to the castle. 

We are going for a picnic on the beach today, I honestly do not care about the lockdown anymore. It only works if we are all in it together, what is the point of my sacrifice if others are just carrying on as normal. 

[Rewulf]

8 hours ago, AVB said:

a)to obtain basic necessities, including food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including any pets or animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons and supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person, or to obtain money, including from any business listed in Part 3 of Schedule 2;

 

(b)to take exercise either alone or with other members of their household;

 

(c)to seek medical assistance, including to access any of the services referred to in paragraph 37 or 38 of Schedule 2;

 

(d)to provide care or assistance, including relevant personal care within the meaning of paragraph 7(3B) of Schedule 4 to the Safeguarding of Vulnerable Groups Act 2006(1), to a vulnerable person, or to provide emergency assistance;

The key word here among the text is vulnerable person(s) 

Cummings child has autism, which means he could travel to provide care for the child, when he and his wife could not do so. Legally, and within guidelines. 

There are particular security concerns, due to fairly obvious hatred and bile directed towards the man, therefore he believed his best option was to travel to his parents. 

Therefore Mr Cummings will be around for a bit longer yet. 😀

Edited May 25, 2020 by Rewulf

[Rewulf]

For some though, the 'excuse' just isn't good enough... 

''Dont know what the truth is' '.... 

Got that right. 

[panoma1]

9 hours ago, henry d said:

How do you know that they are not from the same household?

How presumptive of you? Or are you putting the knife in to those whom you don't like?

🐓

What are the chances of them being from the same household Henry?.........A fair assumption is that they were not! I’m putting the knife into no one! Merely stating fact!

 🤡

[TIGHTCHOKE]

I wonder just what is going on and being missed while the media and a lot of us waste time on the Cummings NON story?

[WalkedUp]

26 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

The key word here among the text is vulnerable person(s) 

Cummings child has autism, which means he could travel to provide care for the child, when he and his wife could not do so. Legally, and within guidelines. 

There are particular security concerns, due to fairly obvious hatred and bile directed towards the man, therefore he believed his best option was to travel to his parents. 

Therefore Mr Cummings will be around for a bit longer yet. 😀

What does his son’s welfare have to do with the trip to the castle? 

I have nothing against the man. However he can’t answer any of the questions, not often do innocent men refuse to speak ... if he had just of admitted his mistake and apologised, accepted a fine or temporary demotion etc that would be fine. In a month we would be back to normal.

[panoma1]

It seems Cummings like Party politics polarises opinion...........To some he’s the devil incarnate, to others he’s a valuable political asset! Bit like brexit, some support it some don’t! Or the Labour Party left Or the Tory right, some will support them whatever, others despise their political dogma.......

Forget the spin, personal preferences and political bias, the facts should decide his fate...........if we ever get the facts?

[Rewulf]

23 minutes ago, WalkedUp said:

What does his son’s welfare have to do with the trip to the castle

Alleged trip to Barnard Castle you mean, by the 'concerned' man who 'thought' he saw him, then 'googled' his no plate? But then had to have it 'confirmed' by the paper he sold his story to? 🤣

27 minutes ago, WalkedUp said:

I have nothing against the man

That's not really true though is it. 

[AVB]

1 hour ago, WalkedUp said:

Direct from gov.uk with my emphasis someone could source the relevant legislation:

If you live with others and you or one of them have symptoms that may be caused by coronavirus (COVID-19), then household members must stay at home and not leave your house for 14 days.

I have posted the relevant legislation. And regarding the bit you have posted there is a section further down that refers to dealing with children. 

[Gordon R]

 

The very press who are conducting the witch hunt. Pathetic.

[Walker570]

1 hour ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

I wonder just what is going on and being missed while the media and a lot of us waste time on the Cummings NON story?

I am afraid this has been the trend of the media throughout. In my view they have all lost any trust.  There is so much hate from some papers and certainly from the BBC.

Having been through a number of suck incidents in my life, including being stripped naked as a child in the local village hall and sprayed with some noxious fluid to ward off some terrible virus or bug back in the early 50s the over reaction to this corvid thingy is just that, an over reaction.  If Cummings wished to drive to his parents place for whatever reason I can see absolutely nothing wrong but of course all the nasty crowd will jump on the band wagon to try and drag him and the government down.  NOW like the scientist guy, was he a bit silly to do that, knowing he has made enemies and someone was going to bubble him to the press. YES, precisely.  NON STORY.

 LOOK AT THE HATE IN THAT WOMANS FACE

All socially distancing of course.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Walker570

[GingerCat]

Just watched the press all squeeze up like a rugby scrum outside cummings house. He had to brush past them to get in the car. 

I expect labour and the lib dems to call for the sacking of those photographers immediately. 

[Newbie to this]

7 minutes ago, GingerCat said:

Just watched the press all squeeze up like a rugby scrum outside cummings house. He had to brush past them to get in the car. 

I expect labour and the lib dems to call for the sacking of those photographers immediately. 

Nothing like a good old bit of hypocrisy, from the british press!

[panoma1]

25 minutes ago, GingerCat said:

Just watched the press all squeeze up like a rugby scrum outside cummings house. He had to brush past them to get in the car. 

I expect labour and the lib dems to call for the sacking of those photographers immediately. 

If true to form? Henry d will probably question “how do you know that they were not all from the same household?” 😂 lol!

[Retsdon]

10 hours ago, Gordon R said:

Not according to the published rules - see post from gingercat.

It seems the police are divided. On the one side there is Gingercat saying that Cummings didn't break the rules, on the other side you have the former Chief Constable of Durham saying he did. https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/former-durham-police-chief-mike-18304258

Take your pick...

[GingerCat]

9 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

It seems the police are divided. On the one side there is Gingercat saying that Cummings didn't break the rules, on the other side you have the former Chief Constable of Durham saying he did. https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/former-durham-police-chief-mike-18304258

Take your pick...

Where did I say he didn't break the rules? Or that he did? 

[JohnfromUK]

17 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Take your pick...

After the way various Chief Constables have performed over SGC renewals/medical records, Operation Midland, our local one who wants speeding prosecuted for only 1 m.p.h. over ....... I'll take GingerCat any day.

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, Gordon R said:

 

The very press who are conducting the witch hunt. Pathetic.

If we are going to talk about breaking ******* rules. lets start with them ******** from the press right here in this video.

 If that social distancing i will stand the drop of york.

[lancer425]

27 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

It seems the police are divided. On the one side there is Gingercat saying that Cummings didn't break the rules, on the other side you have the former Chief Constable of Durham saying he did. https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/former-durham-police-chief-mike-18304258

Take your pick...

As if Durham police know anything, if they had done their firearms licensing properly the mcgoldric women would not be dead, Atherton would never have got near a shotgun. and we would not be looking at these medical records on renewals. They are very good at making massive mistakes, they got a excellent track record of that.