Hot Topics

Will he be chucked out of the house of lords?

  qwbos 01:52 15 Mar 2019

Steele or putty in Smith's hands.

Lord Steel said he had "assumed" that Smith had committed the offences, but said he took no further action because: "It was before he was an MP, before he was even a member of my party. It had nothing to do with me." Lord Steel also described recommending Smith for a knighthood in 1988 and said he did not pass on any allegations about the sexual abuse of children because "I was not aware of any such allegations other than the matter referred to…which appeared to have been fully investigated."

Doesn't say much for either his judgement or standards when he was happy to recommend Smith for a knighthood even when he had "assumed" that his nominee was a child abusing pervert.

  Quickbeam 06:45 18 Mar 2019

Do Lords still have the right to Trial by Piers as Dennis Price did in Kind Hearts & Coronets?

  wee eddie 09:23 18 Mar 2019

QB: Brighton for sure

  john bunyan 09:51 18 Mar 2019

Did you mean Trial by Piers ( Morgan) or by his peers?

  morddwyd 09:59 18 Mar 2019

I would have thought it obvious.

Nor to me, I'm afraid.

Could you spell it, preferably in words of one syllable.

  Quickbeam 11:18 18 Mar 2019

Yes.... Wrong pier!

  Quickbeam 11:19 18 Mar 2019

So.... Can a Lord still be tried by peeps?

  Quickbeam 11:19 18 Mar 2019

Damn auto correct... Peers!

  john bunyan 15:15 18 Mar 2019

The right to trial by their Peers for members of the HoL was abolished in 1948, along with a number of other measures like whipping, penal servitude, hard labour etc.

1948 Act

As a child in the WW2 I remember hearing on the "Home Service" radio of sentences on offenders mentioning "x strokes of the cane" , "hard labour" and "penal servitude". Along with "Treason", also abolished, some (not I) believe that a few of these orders should be repealed!

  Quickbeam 16:21 18 Mar 2019

Thanks JB.

  qwbos 23:54 18 Mar 2019

Nor to me, I'm afraid. Could you spell it, preferably in words of one syllable.

In words of one syllable would be difficult if not impossible.

Steele, without the application of thumbscrews or anything similar, stated that he "assumed" that Smith had committed the child molestation offences that he'd been accused of, though the police dropped the inquiry.

Even though Steele clearly believed that Smith was a paedophile, Steele went on to recommend Smith for a knighthood in 1988. It doesn't matter whether Smith was guilty or not. The problem is that Steele obviously believed Smith was guilty, yet still recommended him for a knighthood. With judgement like that, he shouldn't be sitting on a park bench, never mind in the House of Lords.

Imagine the scene at Buck house. Her Maj taps him on the shoulders with the sword.

Arise Sir Paedo.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Honor Band 5 Sport review

A Wikipedia for Chinese type launches with over 230 Chinese fonts

iMac 2020: new redesign and release date

Les meilleurs VPN pour Kodi (2020)