I’ve got Sky News on the TV at the moment and have just heard the phone conversations between Chris Huhne and Vicky Pryce. I think it is scandalous that they have been made public. I almost felt dirty listening to them. I’m not sure what is proved by their release. Indeed, why have they been made public? I don’t recall this ever happening before. I’m sure it is right that the jury should listen to them, although I am not sure they help Vicky Pryce’s case at all.
Well Iain, It’s as the first comment on your post says:
The phone call has been released for the same reason that Huhne’s son’s text messages were released. They were put forward as evidence against Huhne. Until he pled guilty there were kept confidential. Now that he has changed his tune, they are public record just like any other piece of evidence.
Justice must be done and justice must be seen to be done. Thus evidence in court (with some exceptions, to be sure) is simply public information that may be reported.
14 responses so far ↓
1 Surreptitious Evil // Feb 8, 2013 at 12:35 pm
So turn the TV off then. It isn’t that hard. Normally a button with red printing on it somewhere near the top of your remote …
2 Interested // Feb 8, 2013 at 1:03 pm
If there’s a bigger knobhead out there than Iain Dale, and I include PaulB, Dave and Richard Murphy in that, I have yet to hear of him.
3 Gareth // Feb 8, 2013 at 2:43 pm
Iain Dale wrote: “Indeed, why have they been made public? I don’t recall this ever happening before.”
Evidence given in court is routinely reported by the media.
One thought does spring to mind though – didn’t telephone calls used to be submitted as transcripts?
4 David // Feb 8, 2013 at 3:46 pm
“public information that may be reported.”
With the vital word being “may”. It didn’t need to be reported.
5 cuffleyburgers // Feb 8, 2013 at 4:52 pm
THe more humiliating and unpleasant things that occur to Mr Huhne the happier I shall be.
The loathsome bastard is a first class piece of shit, and it really couldn’t happen to a more obnoxious cunt.
6 bod // Feb 8, 2013 at 5:45 pm
Darth Dale started off as a good and talemted Jedi but he was seduced by the Westminster village culture and has gone over to the dark side.
Now he is just an apologist for every lying scumbag politician out there.
He considers himself “one of them”.
Lost the plot imo.
7 Monty // Feb 8, 2013 at 10:27 pm
Oh hell, I just read a Sky News report of today’s proceedings. It emerged that he tried to make her have a second abortion, and booked her into a hospital. But she dug her heels in, the baby was born, and while he was raised and loved by both his parents, he now knows that his Dad tried to get rid of him.
Poor, poor kid.
8 SadButMadLad // Feb 8, 2013 at 10:55 pm
I must be saying something right to be quoted by the great Tim Worstall. ;-0)
9 PaulB // Feb 8, 2013 at 11:08 pm
Interested: please read and consider Matthew 7:1-5
10 Dr Cromarty // Feb 8, 2013 at 11:58 pm
Thank you, PaulB, you sanctimonious prig. I’ve never perverted the course of justice or prompted my wife to abort my child for any reason, let alone mere convenience, so yes, I will use my moral faculties to make a judgement.
Do you think the Good Lord intended us not to denounce gross wrongdoing? I suggest you look up Luke 7:1-3 or Matthew 18:15-17.
Oh, and piss off.
11 PaulB // Feb 9, 2013 at 12:40 am
Alas Dr Cromarty I wasn’t talking about Huhne. But I’d be interested to hear about the private conversation you had with him, following the advice in Matthew 18:15.
12 bloke in spain // Feb 9, 2013 at 8:42 am
D’y'know. I’ve looked for posts by Matthew @17:15 & 18:15 & Luke at 7:13 an bugger all. Was this on another thread?
13 Dr Cromarty // Feb 9, 2013 at 5:32 pm
Well PaulB given that this is s thread dealing with the duplicitous little shit, perhaps you might confine your comments to the subject at hand. And quit the sanctimony.
14 PaulB // Feb 9, 2013 at 11:32 pm
I was replying to an off-subject comment which named me. You’re picking on the wrong person.
Leave a Comment