GeekLawyer’s Blog

Quickie post.

Geeklawyer is totally fucked off that no-one is going to get nailed and jailed over the cash for honours matter. He does think it comical to see all the politicians and fellow bottom-feeders decrying the length of the investigation and the damage done to the ‘innocent‘ and the body politic.

These people were as innocent as Jack the Ripper. It is Geeklawyer’s belief Lord Levy and Ruth Turner were almost certainly a pair of crooks taking direct, oral only - of course, instructions from Tony Bliar to get money:

TB: Mike. how’s the fund raising going?

ML: Ya, not too bad. A lot of these guy are saying ‘what’s in it for me?‘, you know, the usual.

TB: Presumably you’re giving them the usual advice? “Give some money to charity, fund an orphanage and we’ll sort you out a peerage“, shit like that?

ML: Yea. ‘natch.

TB: So how much are we getting in?

ML: Not nearly enough. There just aren’t enough rich stupid people in the UK.

TB: No? Can’t we get money off Prince Charles?

ML: Nah, don’t think he need a peerage.

TB: Oh, yea, right. OK heres a list of dodgy businessmen I know. MI5 says most are fraudsters, coke smugglers or crooks but frankly I don’t give a shit, just launder the donation so we can deny knowledge.

ML: I don’t need telling my job Tony.

TB: If you don’t start producing results soon you bastard you won’t have one. Ruth’s available to provide ‘extra services’ if needed.

ML: OK, Tony I’ll crack on. (under breath: ‘Sleazy goy cocksucker.’)

TB: (under breath: ‘Sleazy cocksucker.’)

Geeklawyer reckons that they got off only by the politically corrupt decisions of the CPS. The CPS was always going to decide there was no case to answer. It is an organisation well versed in delivering politically convenient decisions dressed up as laboriously derived independent judgment. It is an amusing paradox that it was initially set up to provide independent judgment from the police on the decision whether to prosecute or not; and rightly so, since the police were a little too keen to use prosecutions tactically. That is, arrest the usual suspects and prosecute innocent family members until the suspects agreed to cop a guilty plea. Ah, how Geeklawyer loved the 1970’s.

The answer, then, is clear. The CPS must retain the prosecution decision except where it relates to public function when the police should make the decision.

Of course outraged parliamentarians want to ensure that no-one washes their dirty laundry in public and are plotting to ‘do a Hutton’ on the police. That is, an elaborate witch hunt enquiry that drags Constable Yates (as he soon will be) through the gorse bushes for having the temerity to do his job.

And the fact that no other copper will ever dare investigate parliamentary corruption again for fear of also falling victim is entirely an incidental benefit unfortunate byproduct of necessary democracy.