You are not connected. Please login or register

Bolton Nuts » BWFC » Wandering Minds » Does anybody else think this is a bit wrong in principle?

Does anybody else think this is a bit wrong in principle?

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Guest


Guest
Bernie Ecclestone has been in court on bribery charges in Germany.

Things weren't looking too rosy for Bern, so what does he do?

He offers to pay the court a wad of cash to make it go away.

And it's perfectly legal, apparently.......

How can that be right?

It's almost like he's trying to, er......what's the word......?

Ah yes, got it......"bribe" the court.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28656050

xmiles

xmiles
Youri Djorkaeff
Youri Djorkaeff
That's how justice works for the very rich. Why are you surprised?

Next you will be telling me that we are all in this together.  Rolling Eyes 

Guest


Guest
It just seems a bit brazen.

Anybody know if you can legally do that over here or is it a "progressive" European thing?

wanderlust


Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Breadman wrote:It just seems a bit brazen.

Anybody know if you can legally do that over here or is it a "progressive" European thing?
Not sure about over here but I suspect we're too backward for something as sensible and honest as this.

It's honest because it recognises the reality of the world and the corruption that runs it - something our government goes to great lengths to deny for obvious reasons.

Sensible because having a lengthy trial and then sticking the rich in gaol just costs the taxpayer millions whereas a quick dirty deal actually makes money for the taxpayer - in this case lots of money. Thanks for the new children's hospital Bernie. Now piss off.

Guest


Guest
I see what you're saying, Lusty but it still doesn't sit well with me.

As xmiles points out, it is nothing more than confirmation that we now officially operate a "two tier" judicial system in Europe.

And yes, I know that the well-off and privileged have long been afforded extra protection in the courts, but at least back then, it was all done in private and they at least pretended that they were subject to the same laws and punishments as us poor serfs....

This idea of "making a bribe go away with another bribe" sends out the signal that if you're wadded, you can ignore the law and just buy your way out of trouble if you get caught....and it's all officially sanctioned and perfectly legal.

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
I've got no time for that foetus in a suit. Justice should be blind. To quote aristotle "At his best man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst". What's going on is simply,wrong. Expedient? Perhaps,but wrong for all that.

Guest


Guest
...and they've just accepted his offer.

Why bother putting him on trail for bribery in the first place?

"You can't bribe that banker but you can bribe us."

How's that morally right?

I think, as Lusty suggests, it really is just to generate revenue.

This really does trouble me deeply.

When the courts and judiciary are happy to accept bribes like this, it makes a mockery of the whole concept of punitive justice.

Utter bollocks and I can't believe there isn't more of a fuss being made in the media.

BoltonTillIDie

BoltonTillIDie
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Sky news Flash report just said he was ordered to pay £60m.

Guest


Guest
He's not been "ordered" to do anything.

This is a "without prejudice" payment that he's offered of his own volition which means he walks away without being convicted of any offence.

He's specifically stated that he in no way admits that he's committed any offence and the court has accepted this, so he's a free man without a stain on his character.....

Fucking nonsense!

And apparently the money goes into the coffers of the State of Bavaria to spend as they see fit and the odious little twat glibly suggested they build a Formula One circuit with it.

I wanna kill him with a cricket bat!

Tigermin


Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
Breadman wrote:He's not been "ordered" to do anything.

This is a "without prejudice" payment that he's offered of his own volition which means he walks away without being convicted of any offence.

He's specifically stated that he in no way admits that he's committed any offence and the court has accepted this, so he's a free man without a stain on his character.....

Fucking nonsense!

And apparently the money goes into the coffers of the State of Bavaria to spend as they see fit and the odious little twat glibly suggested they build a Formula One circuit with it.

I wanna kill him with a cricket bat!
Got to disagree Hovis lad,fair play to him, he is using the system in the country he is being tried in to his advantage and as stated ,perfectly legal. If you were being booked for illegal parking and the attendant said you could walk away if you gave him a fiver would you ???

okocha

okocha
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
As long as mankind continues to excuse expediency at the expense of morality, civilisation has no hope of survival.......just ask Baroness Warsi. She should be applauded, instead of which George Osborne says her resignation is unnecessary, thus revealing his complete lack of understanding for what principles entail. This Eton-dominated government has no appreciation of the right thing to do and no empathy with decency, conscience and morality. At present, it's hard to open the newspaper without being sickened by man's inhumanity, cruelty, corruption, hypocrisy and selfishness. Lineker is equally to be applauded for his stance towards FIFA. Breadman, I hope your answer to the question about a parking fine would have been "No, I wouldn't offer money to avoid it."

Guest


Guest
It's unfair, but let's face it what's more useful to society? A drawn out court case ending with an old man paying a smaller fine and going to jail - at the cost of the taxpayer or a £100 million.

Guest


Guest
I honestly would not try and bribe my way out of a parking ticket.

(Don't all shout "Rubbish!" at once, hear me out.)

How can any of us take the moral high-ground in debates like this, if we know we've done something similar (albeit on a much smaller scale) ourselves?

It's the thin end of the wedge if you start turning your moral compass off for little things when it suits you.

I was brought up to tell the truth, treat others fairly and not break the law.

And it's always worked out quite well for me so far.

I am annoyed at Ecclestone for getting away with this but equally I fully appreciate it's the fault of the system that he is able to do so.

And it's the system that I'm questioning.

How on earth can it be right that you can get caught bang to rights trying to influence people by bunging them cash then avoid prosecution by doing the same thing again?

It's morally corrupt and, sadly, indicative of a society that has lost sight of what's really important -Justice.

Where do you draw the line?

Would you let a rapist go free if he offered you a million quid?

It just seems a fundamentally flawed and potentially dangerous way to run a judicial system, which puts financial gain above doing what is right and proper.

And I think it stinks.

Guest


Guest
bwfc1874 wrote:It's unfair, but let's face it what's more useful to society?

With all due respect, that is a staggeringly naive and short-sighted comment.

Can you imagine what society would be like if this practice was rolled out for all crimes and criminals suddenly knew all they had to do if they got caught was offer up a bung?

You would have chaos on the streets within about three weeks and the country would be run by shady crime bosses who knew that they were finally and completely above the law.

I am not being overly dramatic now when I say society would collapse in about five minutes flat.

It'd make West Africa look like the most stable and civilized place on the planet!

okocha

okocha
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
Breadman wrote:
bwfc1874 wrote:It's unfair, but let's face it what's more useful to society?

With all due respect, that is a staggeringly naive and short-sighted comment.

Can you imagine what society would be like if this practice was rolled out for all crimes and criminals suddenly knew all they had to do if they got caught was offer up a bung?

You would have chaos on the streets within about three weeks and the country would be run by shady crime bosses who knew that they were finally and completely above the law.

I am not being overly dramatic now when I say society would collapse in about five minutes flat.

It'd make West Africa look like the most stable and civilized place on the planet!
  :clap:

Guest


Guest
"Prosecutors said Mr Ecclestone's advanced age and other mitigating circumstances gave grounds to accept the $100m offer"

Bet Rolf Harris is kicking himself that he didn't chose Germany when he left Australia.

Guest


Guest
Breadman wrote:
bwfc1874 wrote:It's unfair, but let's face it what's more useful to society?

With all due respect, that is a staggeringly naive and short-sighted comment.

Can you imagine what society would be like if this practice was rolled out for all crimes and criminals suddenly knew all they had to do if they got caught was offer up a bung?

You would have chaos on the streets within about three weeks and the country would be run by shady crime bosses who knew that they were finally and completely above the law.

I am not being overly dramatic now when I say society would collapse in about five minutes flat.

It'd make West Africa look like the most stable and civilized place on the planet!

I think it's you that's being naive, this is what happens when rich people get caught engaging in activity like this. 

They can afford to pay massive bribes like Eccleston has and they do, they don't always get this far and this public before it happens.

Guest


Guest
You're conveniently missing the point.

This payment is state sanctioned - it's an acceptable legal form of settling this matter and that's the dangerous bit.

I'm not disputing the fact that wealthy people the world over have always "greased the wheels" to secure a favourable outcome in matters like this, but that is generally illegal.


The statute book in Bavaria is clearly different to ours because we don't officially accept bribes to make crimes disappear - they obviously do.

And there's a massive difference and that's the point.......

Guest


Guest
Thanks for explaining that in the most condescending way possible.

Really appreciate it.

Guest


Guest
Well.....given that I'd already mentioned the key distinctions between their system and ours in three previous comments and explained why I thought their system was dangerously flawed, only to have you come back and tell me that it was me who was being naive, I thought I'd better spell it out for you......in simpler terms.

scottjames30

scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
You can get away with murder if you're loaded.

wanderlust


Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
But the law is no friend of morality in many cases.

There was a thing today about Judge's taking into account the "impact on the victim" when sentencing. 
So does that mean a crime varies in severity depending on who the victim is?
Surely all victims have equal rights?

Except in UK law.

The moral highground is fine for the holier-than-thou idealists, but idealism is not the real world - it's the pragmatists who recognise reality and do more good.

Guest


Guest
Breadman wrote:Well.....given that I'd already mentioned the key distinctions between their system and ours in three previous comments and explained why I thought their system was dangerously flawed, only to have you come back and tell me that it was me who was being naive, I thought I'd better spell it out for you......in simpler terms.

Clearly I didn't read through your comments before posting, why should I? I gave my opinion on the story which I'd already seen elsewhere. 

No matter how much time you spend on here you don't run this site, you're getting too big for your boots.

Guest


Guest
Christ, I hope you never get selected for jury service, 1874......... Shocked 

Yeah, why bother reading what people have actually written on a subject before you tell them they're wrong......

Fuck me.....!

Guest


Guest
Iv only commented my own opinion and on your reply to me, why you think you deserve some sort of special attention is beyond me.

Guest


Guest
It's not about anybody deserving "special attention", it's about not making yourself look like a dick in public......

I'm not telling you how to enjoy your forum-browsing experience, but if it was me, I'd make sure I'd read exactly what somebody had said on a subject before I told them they were wrong.

You know.....to avoid looking stupid.

It just makes sense to me, but I may be wrong.......

Guest


Guest
Trust me you acting like a condescending twat doesn't make me feel like a dick. All I've done is give my own opinion on the thread topic and replied to your posts. I don't have to read through your earlier comments to other posters to make sure Im up to date with all of your points.

As you always do, you've taken a small segment of a post out of context and started banging on about that. 

Clearly Im not saying every single crime should be solved in this way as you decided to imply. I'm saying that on balance and in this case I think a £100 million fine is more useful than sending him to prison.

BoltonTillIDie

BoltonTillIDie
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
What makes this unfair too is the guy who accepted the bribe is serving about 8 years in prison...

Angry Dad

Angry Dad
Youri Djorkaeff
Youri Djorkaeff
Good result .

Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum