Council tree felling...

[Cyclone 10]

Well, lying in court is perjury, and that's a crime... So if councillors have been playing fast and lose then they can expect to see the inside of a cell.

[Guest makapaka]

Well, lying in court is perjury, and that's a crime... So if councillors have been playing fast and lose then they can expect to see the inside of a cell.

 

Well yes - but what are they being accused of lying about in court?

 

I asked the other poster the same question but they refuse to answer anything put to them.

Edited March 13, 2018 by makapaka

[paula4sheff 10]

---------- Post added 13-03-2018 at 22:19 ----------

 

[/color]

Well yes - but what are they being accused of lying about in court?

 

I asked the other poster the same question but they refuse to answer anything put to them.

 

Your wilful misinterpretation, and surreal and relentless defence of the council against any wrongdoing whatsoever, across numerous threads, means those that post on here often ignore you I'm afraid. Especially with recent events having shown the council to be lying.

 

I'll bother to answer you though- I don't know. I was referencing the commebts of those on the radio, who suggested it, and it is doubtless an angle that will be pursued. If, for instance, the council have claimed in court there are no targets for tree felling- that could now be seen as perjury.

 

Must all be rather worrying for your paymasters.

Edited March 13, 2018 by paula4sheff

[Micky D 14]

Well, lying in court is perjury, and that's a crime... So if councillors have been playing fast and lose then they can expect to see the inside of a cell.

 

I agree with your definition of ‘lying in court’ ; who are you referring to?

 

Come on, name and shame on a public forum, I like a good libel case

[hackey lad 3,965]

I agree with your definition of ‘lying in court’ ; who are you referring to?

 

Come on, name and shame on a public forum, I like a good libel case

 

:hihi: Nice attempt to get the thread closed

[Guest makapaka]

---------- Post added 13-03-2018 at 22:19 ----------

 

[/color]

 

Your wilful misinterpretation, and surreal and relentless defence of the council against any wrongdoing whatsoever, across numerous threads, means those that post on here often ignore you I'm afraid. Especially with recent events having shown the council to be lying.

 

I'll bother to answer you though- I don't know. I was referencing the commebts of those on the radio, who suggested it, and it is doubtless an angle that will be pursued. If, for instance, the council have claimed in court there are no targets for tree felling- that could now be seen as perjury.

 

Must all be rather worrying for your paymasters.

 

I know you won’t, because you can’t, but feel free to post examples of the wilful misinterpretation and surreal and relentless and defences. That way maybe I could respond - instead of you just repeating the same every time.

 

Would you not think it better to gather the facts before posting about people lying in court? If you do that without substantiation it can still be taken as being true by some people when you don’t know as you’ve just said.

 

If it turns out to be true then so be it.

 

You’re reference to paymasters (for the second time in response to my posts) is also false - and again suggests something that is untrue (in this case not potentially just factually).

 

Would you be happy if I accused you of wilful misinterpretation to discredit the council and amey? I don’t think so.

[paula4sheff 10]

I know you won’t, because you can’t, but feel free to post examples of the wilful misinterpretation and surreal and relentless and defences. That way maybe I could respond - instead of you just repeating the same every time.

 

Would you not think it better to gather the facts before posting about people lying in court? If you do that without substantiation it can still be taken as being true by some people when you don’t know as you’ve just said.

 

If it turns out to be true then so be it.

 

You’re reference to paymasters (for the second time in response to my posts) is also false - and again suggests something that is untrue (in this case not potentially just factually).

 

Would you be happy if I accused you of wilful misinterpretation to discredit the council and amey? I don’t think so.

 

You'd be accusing a lot more than just me if that was the case!

 

As you're well aware, wilful misinterpretation isn't one specific example. Your habit is to throw in questions, all the time, to try and change the course of what people are saying. For months you've tried to derail any discussions involving the council constantly. Is it any wondr most of the forum have you written off as an employee, or blocked you long ago?

 

No one is claiming any facts about lying in court- we are repeating the suggestion that was made on the radio that it may have occured.

 

So....here's a question for you. Do you still believe the council's claim that there are no targets for tree felling, despite the contract clearly saying there is?

Edited March 13, 2018 by paula4sheff

[hackey lad 3,965]

I know you won’t, because you can’t, but feel free to post examples of the wilful misinterpretation and surreal and relentless and defences. That way maybe I could respond - instead of you just repeating the same every time.

 

Would you not think it better to gather the facts before posting about people lying in court? If you do that without substantiation it can still be taken as being true by some people when you don’t know as you’ve just said.

 

If it turns out to be true then so be it.

 

You’re reference to paymasters (for the second time in response to my posts) is also false - and again suggests something that is untrue (in this case not potentially just factually).

 

Would you be happy if I accused you of wilful misinterpretation to discredit the council and amey? I don’t think so.

 

:roll:

[Guest makapaka]

You'd be accusing a lot more than just me if that was the case!

 

As you're well aware, wilful misinterpretation isn't one specific example. Your habit is to throw in questions, all the time, to try and change the course of what people are saying. For months you've tried to derail any discussions involving the council constantly. Is it any wondr most of the forum have you written off as an employee, or blocked you long ago?

 

No one is claiming any facts about lying in court- we are repeating the suggestion that was made on the radio that it may have occured.

 

So....here's a question for you. Do you still believe the council's claim that there are no targets for tree felling, despite the contract clearly saying there is?

 

Just seen your edit.

 

I’m unsure to be honest.

 

The council and Justice Males stated that the final decision as to whether a tree is removed lies with the council and Brian lodge said that the 17500 is just to provide headroom. if that is true than I would disagree that there is a target.

 

This hasn’t been cleared up yet so I’ll wait and see without conjecture.

Edited March 13, 2018 by makapaka

[gazza c 10]

I see lord scriven wading into the argument re policing of protests. What did he do for sheffield when he was with lib dem? Nothing. Another politician trying to make a career out of telling us how things should be run, but did nothing when in his politician day job when he should have been doing something, reminds me if nick clegg. I have no affiliation to the libs/lab/or cons or any other party, I understand the concern raised re people being woken up at 5am with police that's only point I can see being an important issue to raise. But his letter in sheff star today is a waste of ink. We would rather have our police fighting knife/gun crime, burglaries etc, real issues affecting everyone, not just a few

[Cyclone 10]

I agree with your definition of ‘lying in court’ ; who are you referring to?

 

Come on, name and shame on a public forum, I like a good libel case

 

Did you miss the key word "IF"?

 

---------- Post added 14-03-2018 at 09:48 ----------

 

What did he do for sheffield when he was with lib dem?

 

http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/mp.php?mpn=Lord_Scriven&mpc=Lords&house=lords&display=allvotes#divisions

 

You could check his voting record to see what he did.

[nightrider 13]

Just seen your edit.

 

I’m unsure to be honest.

 

The council and Justice Males stated that the final decision as to whether a tree is removed lies with the council and Brian lodge said that the 17500 is just to provide headroom. if that is true than I would disagree that there is a target.

 

This hasn’t been cleared up yet so I’ll wait and see without conjecture.

 

The information I saw quoted mentioned a minimum number per some period of time. So if true, that would be a target.