Ukip expels councillor Rozanne Duncan for 'jaw-dropping' comments in TV interview.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Stop It

Are you a politician?

You'd do well as one with such intellectual dishonesty as this.

I'll remember to bring this up whenever a Lab/Lib member gets a similar charge and note if you judge them before they're found guilty too.

is it dishonest now to wait for the evidence to emerge before passing judgement on the alleged event .

[Russ]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

is it dishonest now to wait for the evidence to emerge before passing judgement on the alleged event .

UKIP have confirmed she was expelled, what further evidence of it happening are you hoping for?

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Russ

UKIP have confirmed she was expelled, what further evidence of it happening are you hoping for?

but that's only half of the story its the why that is the important bit there are certain allegations doing the rounds but as yet no firm evidence of why has been produced, and the expulsion is subject to appeal should she wish to take the option . i'm still in favor of a stay of execution until the facts are produced ..

[Russ]

OK so you agree that UKIP expelled her for something, am I right about that?

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Russ

OK so you agree that UKIP expelled her for something, am I right about that?

i'm not a member of said organisation so i cannot comment on what they may or may not have done in respect of this alleged incident ,i am prepared to wait until the evidence if there is any emerges ,i mean for all i know she may have had some kind of mental breakdown or what she allegedly said may have been taken out of context ,this could be just a storm in a tea cup for all i know or the crime of the century but until the evidence emerges there is no point in guessing .

[Russ]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

i'm not a member of said organisation so i cannot comment on what they may or may not have done in respect of this alleged incident ,i am prepared to wait until the evidence if there is any emerges ,i mean for all i know she may have had some kind of mental breakdown or what she allegedly said may have been taken out of context ,this could be just a storm in a tea cup for all i know or the crime of the century but until the evidence emerges there is no point in guessing .

Ukip have confirmed they expelled her, what further evidence do you need to upgrade your opinion from "what they may or may not have done"?

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Russ

Ukip have confirmed they expelled her, what further evidence do you need to upgrade your opinion from "what they may or may not have done"?

all of the evidence pertaining to the alleged incident - as i understand it the BBC may have a copy of an interview with the accused which they say will be aired in February. i don't see that truth would profit from speculating what may or may not have transpired in this alleged incident , best just to wait and see what the beeb have before passing judgement , this woman may even have a legal case to bring to the party who knows , lets wait and see in February

Originally Posted by papa smurf

all of the evidence pertaining to the alleged incident - as i understand it the BBC may have a copy of an interview with the accused which they say will be aired in February. i don't see that truth would profit from speculating what may or may not have transpired in this alleged incident , best just to wait and see what the beeb have before passing judgement , this woman may even have a legal case to bring to the party who knows , lets wait and see in February

All that's happening in febuary is that the documentary is being aired ,i doubt very much that the BBC will air the "jaw dropping racist comments" .The fact that UKIP immediately and "without hesitation" expelled her as soon as they where informed of the comments says everything really ,unless UKIP are in the habit of expelling members under false allegations.Also she has not as yet availed herself of her right of appeal ,again something that speaks volumes.

On a side note this episode and others like it kind of explains why Cameron wasn't that bothered over the defections ,those kind of people are a liability to any party

[Stop It]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

is it dishonest now to wait for the evidence to emerge before passing judgement on the alleged event .

The evidence has emerged and UKIP has acted on it.

The fact that YOU have not seen it isn't relevant. She has committed an act that has resulted in those who have seen it to call her actions "Jaw Dropping" and the UKIP leadership have expelled her from the party.

You're dancing around semantics and that is very much intellectual dishonesty. Again, I shall remember how you have acted in this instance.

Edit: Calling this an "Alleged" incident shows how removed from reality you are. The incident is on tape and will be shown. There is no allegations to be made, and there is evidence on file and seen by those who needed to do so already. Again, just because you haven't seen it doesn't make it any less real.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by martyh

All that's happening in febuary is that the documentary is being aired ,i doubt very much that the BBC will air the "jaw dropping racist comments" .The fact that UKIP immediately and "without hesitation" expelled her as soon as they where informed of the comments says everything really ,unless UKIP are in the habit of expelling members under false allegations.Also she has not as yet availed herself of her right of appeal ,again something that speaks volumes.

On a side note this episode and others like it kind of explains why Cameron wasn't that bothered over the defections ,those kind of people are a liability to any party

well that's interesting to know as a none ukip member with no access to inner party politics i would have no way of knowing that ..its good that a member of the ukip inner sanctum has come forward and put us all straight how long have you been a member and do you have any more tidbits of information

---------- Post added at 10:56 ---------- Previous post was at 10:54 ----------

Originally Posted by Stop It

The evidence has emerged and UKIP has acted on it.

The fact that YOU have not seen it isn't relevant. She has committed an act that has resulted in those who have seen it to call her actions "Jaw Dropping" and the UKIP leadership have expelled her from the party.

You're dancing around semantics and that is very much intellectual dishonesty. Again, I shall remember how you have acted in this instance.

Edit: Calling this an "Alleged" incident shows how removed from reality you are. The incident is on tape and will be shown. There is no allegations to be made, and there is evidence on file and seen by those who needed to do so already. Again, just because you haven't seen it doesn't make it any less real.

thank you judge dread i look forward to my trial and execution

Originally Posted by papa smurf

well that's interesting to know as a none ukip member with no access to inner party politics i would have no way of knowing that ..its good that a member of the ukip inner sanctum has come forward and put us all straight how long have you been a member and do you have any more tidbits of information

As a serving councillor she is obliged to inform her electorate what she will be doing and as yet as far as i can see she has just disappeared without comment

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by martyh

As a serving councillor she is obliged to inform her electorate what she will be doing and as yet as far as i can see she has just disappeared without comment

she has 28 days to launch an appeal have you considered she and her legal team may be putting a case together or that she may have already done so and forgot to inform you .

Originally Posted by papa smurf

she has 28 days to launch an appeal have you considered she and her legal team may be putting a case together or that she may have already done so and forgot to inform you .

Your grasping at straws now ,she hasn't announced anything ,she has (according to Kent online) been unavailable for comment so it is very unlikely that there will be any appeal or even a "legal team"

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by martyh

Your grasping at straws now ,she hasn't announced anything ,she has (according to Kent online) been unavailable for comment so it is very unlikely that there will be any appeal or even a "legal team"

so in your world no comment[at this time ] means no appeal or defense -

[Stop It]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

she has 28 days to launch an appeal have you considered she and her legal team may be putting a case together or that she may have already done so and forgot to inform you .

Or, you know, she might not have a case?

Very quick to defend this person aren't you despite little reason other than being a UKIP member. Funny how you refuse to criticise those who you like yet do not afford that privilege to those who you don't.