Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456
How about innocent until proven guilty? A cornerstone of the British judicial system.
Are the Met investigating the parties or Johnson?
|
I agree with the "innocent until proven guilty", but we are allowed opinions, and my opinion that Johnson is lying is based on the facts we know - he’s a proven liar (been fired a couple of times for lying), he is consistently dishonest (cheating on his wife multiple times, and on his current wife when they were not yet married), he has repeatedly failed to declare interests in the Members’ Register, there were the pictures of them in the garden eating cheese & wine during the lockdown, his admission that he was in a room with around 30 others who had gathered to sing "happy birthday" and eat cake and M&S snacks at a time when this wasn’t allowed, and many other examples.
When it walks like a lying duck, and sounds like a lying duck, it’s usually a lying duck…
---------- Post added at 13:47 ---------- Previous post was at 13:45 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
Well, that’s much more ‘enlightened’ than making your mind up that he was guilty on the basis of allegations only. I am prepared to concede that the report and/or the police investigation may confirm the views you have. I am not being dogmatic as some of you guys are.
I don’t accept your conclusion in the last paragraph. Clearly, she found something for the police to take into account or investigate. That on its own doesn’t making him guilty either.
|
Quote:
|
There is no way that Boris will be prosecuted or fined as it is pretty clear from what we know that there is insufficient evidence to do so
|