Who next for Tory Leader/PM?

[I1L2T3 10]

6 minutes ago, ez8004 said:

Actually no.  Not if it was recorded in a public space or place you have a right to be in as this person was. 

 

Also he didn’t publish it. 

And weren’t the actions of Johnson and his partner invading the privacy of others. The row was audible from the street.

 

It is reasonable to record it. And reasonable to hand the recording to the police which is what the couple did initially. 

 

The character of a prospective PM is completely in the public interest so it is also reasonable to make the recording available in an appropriate way. The couple could have put it straight on social media. They didn’t but supplied it to a media outlet that reported on it but did not publish it.

 

Nothing wrong with any of this.

4 minutes ago, Ridgewalk said:

Please God let this be the case

No I'm not. Chukka is a sincere non opportunistic politician. 

 

Lets hope Jeremy does

Does he really want to be PM? I’m not sure now

2 hours ago, JamesR123 said:

I was watching BBC Breakfast and apparently this couple have a Twitter history laden with anti Tory tweets.

 

I used to live in a flat and I would hear people argue fairly regularly.  That's a part of living in a flat.  I never called the police.  I also never recorded people in other flats.

 

It is obvious that there is an agenda to this, and the couple should be named.

 

Bojo is still a fool though.

No need to name the couple and a imbecilic witch-hunt.

 

They have already voluntarily gone on public record.

 

The person who recorded the altercation is Tom Penn

[Top Cats Hat 10]

Can I remind those looking for some agenda or conspiracy, that the phone recording would have been exactly the same if it were recorded by Adolf Hitler, Nigel Farage or Steve Bannon.

 

If Johnson hadn’t been having a screaming row with his partner that could be heard outside the confines of the flat then no one would have been able to record anything! 🙄

[Voice of reason 0]

43 minutes ago, ez8004 said:

Actually no.  Not if it was recorded in a public space or place you have a right to be in as this person was. 

 

Also he didn’t publish it. 

I think if it was published it would change things. On another thread somebody posted a link describing legality of cctv recording the street outside your house, and data protection. It seems similar category to me.

If they were on his doorstep, they could have been on his property too, depends if it exits straight onto the street.

[I1L2T3 10]

4 minutes ago, Voice of reason said:

I think if it was published it would change things. On another thread somebody posted a link describing legality of cctv recording the street outside your house, and data protection. It seems similar category to me.

If they were on his doorstep, they could have been on his property too, depends if it exits straight onto the street.

They were careful not to publish it.

 

What we have is a description of what happened. It is entirely legal to publish that description, unless of course it is not true.

 

But they have a recording. It would take a special kind of idiot to take it to court if a recording would verify the truthfulness of the description.

 

A court case would also reveal the multiple calls to the police that happened, and risk the audio of those becoming public.

 

Johnson is over a barrel with this one.

 

If at a future date some dirt is required then......the audio recording 

Edited June 23, 2019 by I1L2T3

[altus 538]

9 minutes ago, Voice of reason said:

I think if it was published it would change things. On another thread somebody posted a link describing legality of cctv recording the street outside your house, and data protection. It seems similar category to me.

If they were on his doorstep, they could have been on his property too, depends if it exits straight onto the street.

They recorded it in their own home.

[Voice of reason 0]

6 minutes ago, I1L2T3 said:

They were careful not to publish it.

 

What we have is a description of what happened. It is entirely legal to publish that description, unless of course it is not true.

 

But they have a recording. It would take a special kind of idiot to take it to court if a recording would verify the truthfulness of the description.

 

A court case would also reveal the multiple calls to the police that happened, and risk the audio of those becoming public.

 

Johnson is over a barrel with this one.

 

If at a future date some dirt is required then......the audio recording 

Truth is, nobody knows what actually happend.

Lots of usual suspects will try to use the story to insuate very bad things about him.

That could be true, it could also be a very vocal argument - gossip worthy and nothing else.

So, obviously some people will hype it to the max, others will play it down. Both sets having agendas.

1 minute ago, altus said:

They recorded it in their own home.

I thought they did it on the doorstep. Don't know the legality then. It's a recording from in your own home, of someone in theirs. Lots of legal ifs and buts.....

Edited June 23, 2019 by Voice of reason

[Ridgewalk 97]

Johnson's...sorry ..." Bo Jo" is going to pull out of the contest now isn't he ? 🥺

[ANGELFIRE1 10]

3 minutes ago, Ridgewalk said:

Johnson's...sorry ..." Bo Jo" is going to pull out of the contest now isn't he ? 🥺

In your dreams only.

 

If he did the only beneficiary would be the Brexit Party as Boris's opponent is a remainer at heart just like May.

 

Angel1.

[Ridgewalk 97]

41 minutes ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

In your dreams only.

 

If he did the only beneficiary would be the Brexit Party as Boris's opponent is a remainer at heart just like May.

 

Angel1.

Nobody could argue that irony’s lost on you could they ? 😁

[Top Cats Hat 10]

1 hour ago, Voice of reason said:

I thought they did it on the doorstep. Don't know the legality then. It's a recording from in your own home, of someone in theirs. Lots of legal ifs and buts.....

Can we just nail this legality/illegality thing on the head once and for all?

 

The right to privacy is predicated upon what is deemed to be a reasonable expectation of privacy. If you and your partner are screaming at each other so loudly that your words can be heard clearly through the walls of a solidly built Victorian townhouse then you will really struggle to make a case that your privacy has been violated.

 

I say publish the tape and let people make their own minds up about what went on.

[tinfoilhat 11]

1 hour ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

In your dreams only.

 

If he did the only beneficiary would be the Brexit Party as Boris's opponent is a remainer at heart just like May.

 

Angel1.

Got quite heated round at Boris’ missus flat. If he had back handed her (only if she deserved it mind) is he still your man for brexit?

[Mister M 1,608]

During the argument, his partner said “You just don’t care for anything because you’re spoilt. You have no care for money or anything.” And that's from someone who knows him best!

 

From Johnson's housemaster at Eton:

‘Boris sometimes seems affronted when criticised for what amounts to a gross failure of responsibility.’

‘I think he honestly believes that it is churlish of us not to regard him as an exception, one who should be free of the network of obligation which binds everyone else.’

 

Max Hastings, his former employer at the Telegraph:

a gold medal egomaniac. I would not trust him with my wife nor – from painful experience – my wallet... He is also a far more ruthless, and frankly nastier, figure than the public appreciates.”

 

Eddie Mair, see the link, in an interview with Johnson, exposes him for the 'nasty piece of work he is':

 

https://www.facebook.com/ThePileus/videos/458546134482847?s=100010258712884&v=e&sfns=mo

Also worth a read is this summary of his lies:

https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/times-boris-johnson-flat-lied/

Edited June 23, 2019 by Mister M