Craig,

I appriciate your horror at the sight of Jack Straw treating in Blackburn; but doens’t it hinge on whether or not the intent was to corrupt the coming election result or not?

The law against treating doesn’t say that providing a free meal for voters at an election meeting is illegal, in itself, does it? It’s only treating if the purpose, or intent, is to corruptly influence the result in one’s favour, and proving that in a court of law is going to be very difficult indeed.

Jack Straw isn’t going to admit that he was seeking to treat, or “buy” votes, and I imagine it would be difficult to find anyone involved in the feast that was willing to say that they were going to vote for Straw because they received a free lunch.

In our day, when food is so plentiful and cheap, as opposed to the nineteeth century, getting a court to accept that a meal was going to sway people into voting for a particular candidate, seems unlikely. Especially a high-profile candidate like Straw, who it will be argued, doens’t need to buy votes by treating.

The Law, like so much else in society, isn’t really, in practice, a neutral. It favours, and always has, it’s part of the structure of “justice” after all; the rich and powerful disproportionally. This is the kind of society we live in. A society where wealth and power… matter, and give one access to justice in a way the poor can only dream about. To call this system “unfair”, is, I would contend, to grossly misunderstand the fundamental nature of our democracy.

Writerman has a point, Craig. Thanks for bringing this issue to the light, which it obviously needs. It seems to me that the letter of the law, as you quoted it, is that no offence has been committed unless there was an intention to corrupt. But how on earth can you prove such an intention? To you, with your opinion of Straw’s character (which I must admit I share) there can be no shadow of a doubt. But how can you prove it objectively? Only by finding people who were treated and who will testify that, in return for the food and drink, Mr Straw personally asked them to vote or not vote in a particular way. That seems most unlikely.

It looks like yet another law deliberately drafted to be obscure and subject to interpretation. The authorities can and will deploy it when it suits them, but they are impervious to it themselves.

Democracy? Ptui!

Have you made any of the national press aware of this Craig? If there really was anything here, someone would surely have picked up on it?

I agree with you, by the way.

This is probably arcane; but actually proving that Straw provided free food, for the purpose of corruptly influencing the election, is going to be impossible, and is a waste of time and effort, though I suppose if some newspaper jumped on the bandwagon in an attempt to embarass Straw it might have some effect, though I doubt it.

Is providing free food corrupt, or is the emphasis on the “corrupt” purpose behind providing free food the central issue here?

Writerman,

No, you are plain wrong. There is 170 years of case law on treating. If the purpose of the meeting is to persuade electors to vote, and the food is given at that meeting, that is already corrupt inducement – in exactly the same way as if it was ten quid notes you were giving.

If you say “Please vore for me and here is a ten quid note in your pocket my man” it does not require any further act to prove corrupt intent.

Tom,

I am getting today another affidavit which says exectly that.

Anyone who thinks that there is any defense of Jack Straw in this case has had their sense of right and wrong warped by 13 years of Labour government. You’ll be telling us it was legal to invade Irag next.

Craig,

Fine. Now you’re bringing in case law, and 170 years of precedent, which clearly backs your interpretation of the law on treating; in your opinion. And I stand corrected. You seem to have an open and shut case against Straw.

It would be nice to see him fined and jailed for treating in Blackburn, when he escaped justice for his other, more serious, war crimes. That would be rather ironic.

It’s interesting, at least for me, that where I see confusion in the law and room for interpertation and wiggle-room, the stuff that keeps lawyers working overtime; you see things so clearly and in perfect black and white. I suppose this may have something to do with the difference between the idealist and the cynic.

Writerman,

Oh, I think the lawyers will wiggle like hell. But the meaning and intent of the law is very plain indeed. Criminal law should always be construed in everyday English and a reasonable way – strained interpretations don’t really wash in criminal defence.

But I don’t expect Straw will ever be prosecuted – this is New Labour’s Britain, and deeply corrupt.

I share your astonishment at the legal wriggles offered up in this column. One might imagine that Straw himself was leading the chamber orchestra. You have seen too much of the unprincipled and lawless behaviour in our country not to question whether some contributors are what I call ‘inserts’. All about there are people who are there to sap our resolve. Your site is unique in several ways, not least for its detailed insights and knowledge.

Crack on Craig. Straw is a good symbol of the rottenness in this isle.

There could only be one possible reason for Jack Straw treating in Blackburn – to corrupt the coming election result.

Jack Straw’s love for Muslims except during election time was clearly defined when he authorised the unlawful merciless slaughter of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians in the illegal war Miliband wants us to forget about.

Writerman says:

‘It’s interesting, at least for me, that where I see confusion in the law and room for interpertation and wiggle-room, the stuff that keeps lawyers working overtime; you see things so clearly and in perfect black and white. I suppose this may have something to do with the difference between the idealist and the cynic.’

If I may be forgiven an academic interlude, this is interesting to me too. It seems to me that in the sixties and seventies we were taught to see things in black and white, to look for right and wrong. Then along came post-modernism, and it is now politically incorrect to take a definite stand on anything. OJ Simpson is the ultimate example, but post-modernism is a culture of alternative narratives, a multiplicity of viewpoints, no absolute truths, and while we can all learn a lot from this, it especially enables to understand the different positions people take in more depth, it is also important to remember that we all have the right to take a definite position and act on that basis. Post-modernism just means we have to think a bit harder.

“I was frankly astonished by commenters on the last thread who claimed not to understand that it was an offence to distribute free food and drink at an election rally”

It’s called playing devil’s advocate. I don’t think anyone claimed not to understand that it is an offence, only that the wording of the Electoral Commission’s guidance offers too many get-out clauses for it to be enforceable.

It is axiomatic that one has to obey both the letter and the spirit of the law. Otherwise there would be no need for wizined old judges and case law would be made by grammarians!

The affidavit should say Jack Straw and Mohammed Sarwar, not Jack Straw MP and Mohammed Sarwar MP.

Since parliament was dissolved, they are no longer MPs, and will not become MPs again unless they are re-elected. As far as I’m aware Mohammed Sarwar isn’t standing for election this time.

(a) How do you know that the provision was contained in the Reform Act specifically to outlaw the practice of giving food and drink at election meetings, even to one’s supporters?

(b) Are there case law references on the internet which would confirm that to give food and drink to one’s own supporters counts as treating? I ask because I suspect that giving food and drink to one’s own supporters does not count as treating. That would exempt what Straw was doing.

(c) If you’re right, how come the Lib Dems in Blackburn aren’t making a fuss about this matter?

Abe -

This is the last time I am going to be patient with you. I seriously question your motives in defending the indefensible like this.

I have already told you that the people were by no means all New Labour supporters. But it is not a defence to say “They were alll my supporters”.

I do not have time to write a treatise on the subject. Some simple google searches on “Treating” and “provisions of the 1832 reform act” will answer your questions. Any serious standard history of the 19th Century will explain this – try Trevelyan.

This really is every schoolboy knows stuff.

Abe

Sorry but you are plain wrong firstly if he gives food to his own supporters it would still be treating unless it was in private and they were directly under his control i.e. leaflet droppers etc. And even then if they were local voters he would have to be very careful. And if they are all supporters why did everyone on stage tell them to vote straw? The legislation is very simple in legal terms and in these circumstances it is virtualy an absolute offence. Food/drink + telling people vote for me is corrupt. I am guessing he will claim that the event was organised by a local Muslim group who traditionally provide food at all community meetings. And he wasnt aware that food was provided. He will say it is a cultural thing and when he is re elected he will make allowances in the law. Which is a bit flawed because I think it is culturaly normal all over the UK to provide food at meetings and rallies regardless of culture thats why we have laws. The last part would be covered by directly or indirectly. Maybe Cameron should set up a soup kitchen with blue rossettes and posters all over it saying vote conservative get a free lunch?? The big prob is that I think it is DPp advice for the CPS to prosecute so one call from Straw will bosh that unless he loses of course.

159 Candidate reported guilty of corrupt or illegal practice

(1) If a candidate who has been elected is reported by an election court personally guilty or guilty by his agents of any corrupt or illegal practice his election shall be void.

Lets hope

Oh, he’s going to lose anyway. But let’s try to get justice served and the criminal law applied.

He must be getting desperate, he has just apologised for his anti-Niqab articles.

This has really upset Murdock owned papers.

Arsalan,

I knew he had apologised, but can you give me a media reference?

Craig

“Then along came post-modernism, and it is now politically incorrect to take a definite stand on anything.”

For the Postmodern there are no distinctives, there is no black or white, everything is in tones of grey.

So the trick is to take a holistic view so that words are followed by deeds – Craig is delivering affidavits.

In post-modern society the churches are empty or sparesly filled with generation-x. Inspiration must come from within ourselves…

Why has it taken 8 years to inquire into the killing fields of Iraq. A ‘war’ founded on lies?

Why has it taken 30 years to expose the cover-up behind the death of Blair Peach or demand an inquiry into the death of Ian Tomlinson or to demand the true facts of 7/7 where conflicting evidence exists?

Why Why Why

Because we are too content with words and statements, instead of getting off our arses and doing something more.

…and brake the loaves, and gave them to his disciples to set before them – thus virtually holding forth these men as His future ministers.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown

Straw apologies over Niqab:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1269055/General-Election-2010-Jack-Straw-says-sorry-Muslim-veil.html

I agree with Craig Murray.

When I went to North Korea, there were all kinds of entertainments such as pop bands and little kids riding around on unicycles to make it look like the elections were fun.

There was only one winner, of course.

By the way, you can actually see me in this photograph from the Pyongyang Times, if you really want.

http://angrysoba.blogspot.com/2009/03/potemkin-ballot-boxes.html

Admittedly, this is very different.

One of his greater crimes (among many) is his complicity in torture by Britons.

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index.php/news/content/view/full/89646

Craig,

I have no idea why the commenters are against you on this but think it weird that most of them are your regular commenters.

One of the others is David Halpin who is one of the loons who think David Kelly was murdered.

Ordinarily these people are on your side.

What in blazes is going on?

Whoops! I now realize that David Halpin is on your side.

Craig

I shall disregard the implied threat in your comment. I don’t have to agree with you, whether you like it or not, and I’m still not convinced that feeding one’s own supporters is an offence. You have still not explained why, if this is not a criminal offence, your own Lib Dem party in Blackburn, nor the Tories, are doing anything about it.

Therefore, you are mistaken and I find Jack Straw Not Guilty.

Wonder how many others of the NuLabour slimy toads are lining up new careers like this loathsome twosome, Balls and Mandelson (though they deny it).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1269154/GENERAL-ELECTION-2010-Mandelson-Balls-deny-planning-life-Brown.html

Abe – “Threat”? Come now! Anyway, let’s be serious about this treating business. Look at this extract from The Pickwick Papers to see just a partial example of how rotten and corrupt elections were in Dickens’ time:

http://www.historyhome.co.uk/readings/election.htm

Are you actually prepared to believe that Straw – purely out of the goodness of his heart, and without the idea of gaining votes crossing his mind – woke up one morning and thought he’d put a smile on the faces of 700 people? People that just happened to be voters in his own district?

There appears to be some chin-rubbing about whether this was with “corrupt intent” or not. If – in this spirit of this law – we’re talking about swaying voting intent, then how could it not be with “corrupt intent”? What else do you think that law is for?

Did you also notice in yesterday’s blog entry of 11:19, how:

–start quote

… an independent candidate, Bushra Irfan, was reported to the police by the returning officer for an internet page that suggested that food would be given at a meeting. Irfan’s campaign apologised and removed the offending page; no food was given.

—end quote

There doesn’t seem to be any confusion in that case!

The way some people here would ponder over “corrupt intent” would render this law completely pointless. The law is to prevent candidates winning favours by bribing voters – whether by putting £10 notes in their pockets, or by providing them with free food and drink.

Craig, what are the chances, if the LibDems either win outright or form a coalition government, that we will have a proper judicial inquiry into the Iraq war?

Craig here’s one:

Posted by: glenn at April 27, 2010 12:52 PM

I’ve worked on a number of by-elections as an SNP canvasser/leafletter and in all of them I expect to find soup and sandwiches in the breaks back at campaign HQ (occasionally speeches from party leaders too, but nothing in this life is perfect). It distinguishes our campaigns from the others – while they trudge around spitting at each other, we’re actually having quite a good time. Is this illegal?

Craig,

Have you heard about some complete piece of shit called John Hirst?

I am a little bit sympathetic to the Lib Dems myself and so is this blogger who was pissed off with this guy:

http://efrafandays.wordpress.com/2010/04/26/so-i-blogged-with-an-axe-murderer/

Vronsky, you sound like one of those infesters.

But seriously, I don’t know how this law is supposed to be applied because, if I remember correctly, even your own campaign in Norwich sounded like you ended each canvassing trip with some kind of party with a band. Surely it becomes a bit difficult to know where it stops given that the law you quoted includes “entertainment”.

angrysober,

“One of the others is David Halpin who is one of the loons who think David Kelly was murdered.”

loon? – or holistic thinking?

Thanx for your blog links – I now fully understand computing G-loads from a 2 dimensional radius model using live data.

http://tinyurl.com/g-force-computation

An excellent example of holistic action using scientific tools.

Glenn

I believe the smiles Jack Straw wanted to put on faces were those of his own party members. That is, he went up there to give 700 party activists in the Muslim community a good meal and a pep talk. The whole thing was a morale boost. That’s what I think was going on. That’s precisely why I don’t regard it as an attempted bribe to vote Nulab – I believe they were all Nulab voters anyway.

You lot wouldnt make good policemen firstly if they are all his supporters then why were they holding an election rally urging them to vote and as people are swearing afidavits as we speak that were there they are not supporters. It is obvious this was a public election meeting with the sole purpose to get people to vote for him. Not a few party workers having a few beers after a hard days campaigning in a private house with no speaches and no public. Stop looking for excusing the unexcuable this is what it looks like a simple breach of the law.

Mark, I don’t think that “holistic thinking” really means anything in the context you use it.

By the way, it is naughty of you to link to such seriously off-topics as that.

If you really want, I’ll put up a post on my blog and won’t censor or edit anything.

Just say “Yea” or “Nay” to that.

Angrysober,

Holistic thinking means everything and recognises that there is point in our modern post war time-line where justification for illegal wars by distorting the truth and engineering catalysts for increasing attempts to shut down public opinion, including booting dissenting voices out of Parliament, cover-ups and encouraging excuses by those who spend copious amounts of time attacking holistic views, distorting evidence and creating confusion, is polarizing our existence.

All substantiated and reflected in the present loss of public confidence in our ‘big brother’ society.

A ‘hung’ parliament is now ‘de rigeur’ and has spiralled into a ‘rush’ of detailed ‘how-to’s’ on-line to achieve this outcome.

A ‘hung’ parliament is our voice and our dissatisfaction and concern; holistic thinking ‘in action’ by the British people.

“You are either with us or against us.”

off-topic:

(doubly off-topic, really; for one, this comment is not about the post at hand. moreover, craig being an expert on uzbekistan does not automatically make him an expert on kyrgyzstan. nevertheless, lacking other prominent experts on the region, it’s worth a try).

craig, it appears that the us have obtained a renewal of their lease on the military base they operate in kyrgyzstan. savoury detail is that this happened one day after the forceful removal of the president. also, it happened without consent of parliament, because – quoting the bbc article – “there was currently no parliament in place”.

this from the bbc news site, via legitgov.org, a site you recommended not long ago.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8624723.stm

do you have an opinion about this coincidence?

thanks,

mbotta

I am not, in any way, a fan of Jack Straw. I think he’s guilty as hell of numerous, serious, international, war crimes, which I love him to be prosecuted for and hopefully found guilty.

I just don’t think there’s a snowball’s chance in hell of a court finding him guilty of corruption in relation to the crime of treating in Blackburn. Saying that one doubts it can be proven that Straw is guilty isn’t the same thing as meaning that he isn’t guilty. My opinion of Straw is irrelevant in this case, my loathing and antipathy towards the man and everything he stands for, doesn’t matter.

Years ago… if my memory serves me well…I was at a meeting of the NSU, rememeber them. I was a delegate, and a local, charismatic, star. Anyway, Jack Straw was on his way up too, up the greasy and easy pole of student politics, and who knew where else? So, up steps Jack and vigourously attacks a motion… until someone shouted that executive actually supported it.

Whoops for Jack. Almost without missing a heartbeat, our honest Jack Straw, completely reverses the thrust of his speech and is now pasionately and vigourously in favour of the motion.

It was things like this that turned me off student politics and the greasy pole and heights one could rise to, if one had the temperament and stomach for it. Britain, and the world, was saved from the ravages of Tony Blair’s evil twin.

Mark, what you wrote there is meaningless babble. Even you must know that.

“Holistic thinking means everything” which is no different to saying “holistic” means “nothing”.

“recognises that there is point in our modern post war time-line where justification for illegal wars by distorting the truth and engineering catalysts for increasing attempts to shut down public opinion, including booting dissenting voices out of Parliament, cover-ups and encouraging excuses”.

What the bloody hell are you talking about? This was far more prevalent in George Orwell’s time both before and during world war two. Why on Earth do you think that freedoms have been eroded post-war?

“attacking holistic views, distorting evidence and creating confusion, is polarizing our existence.”

Wrong. Your use of “holistic” just sounds like a New Age departure from “thought”.

What creates confusion is the fact there are many different outlets for opinions these days – a good thing – but such a diversity of thought means that it is difficult for people to agree.

Whereas many of you (Mark Golding, MJ, dreiloin etc…) like to talk about an oppressive authoritarian viewpoint imposed from on high the reality is starkly different. You can read news from almost anywhere in the world and form your opinions from millions of blogs or overseas news sources.

The problem is that even the most extreme minority views that are usually spread very thinly around the world such as the paranoid community can form a large self-reinforcing bloc when online gradually tending towards the more extreme and conspiratorial end of the political spectrum.

If one in a thousand people can think 2 plus 2 equals 5 then there are millions of people around the world who can believe it and they can form their own little communities online telling each other it is true and presenting “evidence” for it that their governments suppress and reinforcing each others’ mistaken beliefs.

There will also those who think that some people will prefer 2 plus 2 to equal 4 and others to prefer it to equal 5 and that everyone should be allowed to believe what they want. That there is no “TRUTH”. Always watch out for those as they will tend to be more dogmatic than others, ironically.

Anyway, sorry if I have derailed this thread. I didn’t do it on purpose and certainly not for Jack Straw’s benefit.

Vornsky

It probably is not illegal to feed your own party workers privately. But this was not the same thing at all. It was an election rally to urge several hundred electors to vote.

@ angrysoba

“Whereas many of you (Mark Golding, MJ, dreiloin etc…) like to talk about an oppressive authoritarian viewpoint imposed from on high the reality is starkly different. You can read news from almost anywhere in the world and form your opinions from millions of blogs or overseas news sources.”

With respect i disagree.I believe that the MSM bludgeons us with a concerted message that is promoted/engineered from on high.The opinions of millions of satellite blogs exist as a howl of outrage at the Manichean simplicities and,often,downright bulllshit that the MSM-with its huge influence-bombards us with.

Craig,

I thoroughly agree. Jack Straw is treating, cheating, and should be pulled up for it.

Angrysoba,

I agree with Jives. The Internet has given the public a voice, but the mainstream media still has overwhelmingly larger amplifiers and speakers.

There are millions (including myself) who consider it possible or likely that Dr Kelly was murdered.

“Holistic” has been overused by the New Age community, but that doesn’t make it the opposite of thought, it is about looking at the bigger picture.

Dr Halpin is not a “loon”, he is conscientious and works hard to alleviate suffering in Gaza.

Abe Rene

I am in Blackburn. I have just returned from handing in affidavits to he police. I have met and interviewed many of the people involved.

As I have said to you now three times, the people were by no means all Labour Party. Why you insist on putting forward a theory based on demonstrably false “facts” I have no idea.

angrysoba,

Yes, I am wondering about people’s motives too.

They might work for the sleazy labour propoganda machine. Urgent message to yanks, urgent regime change required in the UK, they got WMD’s

Clark: Don’t you know that a “loon” is defined as anybody who disagrees with AngryLarry?

“the mainstream media still has overwhelmingly larger amplifiers and speakers.”

Well surely that has always been the case. It makes no sense to rail against “influential people being influential” but does make sense to say, for example, look at the way that Rupert Murdoch’s broadcasters have rigged the debate, which Craig did. I can get on board with that.

Similarly, good luck with taking Jack Straw to task if he is buying votes and the same to general campaigns for stopping individuals being deported or tortured.

Again, very laudable and worthy of respect and support.

Glenn: I consider a loon someone who tries to argue black is white or thinks that we all need to “get all holistic and stuff”. I.E withdrawing from any rational debate and focusing on crazy shit.

Abe Rene: What causes you to “believe” (in your 14:26 post) these things to the extent that you have such confidence in Straw’s benign motives? I’m rather puzzled at why you think this spineless crook has suddenly become beyond reproach, in your mind, to the extent that you’ll “believe” almost anything that puts him in a good light.

Ruth left a post on the previous thread about Sarwarr’s son Athif, who was jailed for 3 years for his massive caousel VAT fraud and who was released after two weeks on compassionate grounds. An appeal was pending in July 2007 but no trace can be found of the outcome or indeed if one was heard. What a corrupt legal system there must be in Scotland.

Whilst looking I came across this previous thread of Craig’s and was staggered to read that Straw had done this treating before.

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2007/06/jack_straw_shou_1.html

Is there no end to these miscreants’ trickeries.

Below: An election entertainment by Hogarth. Which one’s Jack?

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/arts/painting/paintings/bigphotos/H/elect01.jpg

Look, I’m telling you again. Find out who the caterers were, if it is anything but HMC tell everyone it was Harram.

You white guys don’t understand Asians in general and Muslim northern Asians in particular.

People from the Indian subcontinent are not particularly religious, but when it comes to food and whether or not it is Hallal they are very serious.

Find out who provided the food.

Jack Straw is a Zionist, he supported two wars against Islam, and all this was tolerable for northern Muslims who voted him in. But Harram food labelled as Hallal, well that is where their tolerance ends.

Arsalan,

I don’t doubt the food was halal. That is nothing to do with why it was illegal.

Whatever’s happened to Larry? Is he not interested in UK domestic politics? Or has he jumped onto a bus to the Mid-West? He never responded to any of my rather polite invitations, did he? Ah, snubbed! Just… the silence (of the lambs), emanating from the depths of Vauxhall. Perhaps, then, the domestic arena is being left to a different set of hired hands – as the old folk song runs, “let’s go for a jolly jaunt o’er Lambeth Bridge, tra-la-la, tree-lee-lee”.

“Muslim northern Asians” Arsalan

Eee by gum, me lad, it’s a rum do an no mistakin it! The stra’ man’s been mekin ‘ay! As me moother used te say, it were nowt else but a big Testie Festy!

Those Asian who are about to vote for him in exchange for that free meal couldn’t give a shit about how illegal it is, but they maybe interested in rumours that it might be Harram.

Asians couldn’t careless about legality.

The elders still remember living under the British Raj. They didn’t cooperate with the imperialists due to loyalty, they did it for benefit.

And now that they are here, it is all about benefit.

What most Muslims don’t know is a lot of the food sold as Hallal in this country is Harram. It is cheaper to kill animals by machines than it is by hand so that is what a lot of butchers do, then they falsely label to meat as Hallal to sell it for a higher Hallal price.

They can get around the trades description act by paying for certification. This takes liability away from the business and puts it on the certification company.

HMC inspect at every stage, so if it is HMC it is Hallal.

But this would also mean it is unlikely to be HMC, because inspect from slaughter to sale is expensive.

HFA just sell certifications, they don’t inspect, allow electrocution, mechanical slaughter and even recorded blessings.

So if it is HFA it is more than likely to be Harram.

What you don’t understand about Asians, both Muslims and Hindus is they take food rules of religion very seriously.

Remember the Indian mutiny of 1856?

Those Muslims and Hindus, joined the British Army against their own people, but when they suspected that the bullets

they used were covered with Animal fat they mutinied.

Jack Straw they them food for votes.

You care that it it illegal, the people doing the voting don’t.

What I am telling you is attack his underbelly, tell them that it isn’t proven that the meat is Hallal, at least not HMC certified and inspected Hallal.

Arsalan,

Stop this stupid smokescreen. The food was halal, I am not going to spread lies about Jack Straw. That is one reason we are better than him.

It was however an illegal act. I am not trying to influence the election, I am trying to get the criminal law applied and Jack Straw put in jail.

Craig you seem to be getting your knickers in a twist about this. The provision of food is irrelevant. Both the intention has to be corrupt and the intention to influence the vote has to be corrupt and neither you nor any other person could possibly prove that. You are wasting your time. How on earth would you ever prove that someone has voted a certain way because they had a little curry and rice? Apart from anything else it is very patronising, and dare I say it racist, on your part to imagine that anyone would change or maintain their voting intentions on account of such a slender inducement.

P.S. David Halpin IS a well known loon.

The affadavit is pure genius, Craig. You’ve got the “Minister of Justice” bang to rights and no mistake.

Unless the deeply suspicious Abe Rene is actually a Crown Court judge, I think we can all safely disregard his desperate efforts to defend the Straw man.

Now: “I have just returned from handing in affidavits to he police. I have met and interviewed many of the people involved.”

Was a camera on hand to record these historic events and can we relish the moment via a blog post?

One clever thing about the situaton you have created here is, that if the Chief Constable doesn’t act, he’s not going to look too good in front of the Independent Police Complaints Commission. So I can see the chief of police doing the right thing here and asking the Minister of Justice to drop by the cop shop to make a statement.

“Both the intention has to be corrupt and the intention to influence the vote has to be corrupt”

The purpose of free food is to get people to the meeting. The purpose of getting people to the meeting is to get them to vote for Straw. Therefore the purpose of the food is to get people to vote for Straw.

Why else give food away?

Those guys give their votes to the highest bidder. If the highest bid is some rice, a bit and a piece of chicken, then they’ll offer their vote for it.

Your definition of a ‘loon’ is consistent with your works Angrysober, maybe instead of ‘loon’ you really mean ‘fruitcake,’ a word that has propagated the ‘webasphere’ wrapped in a veneer of your ‘red cross’ glib.

I won’t expand further, only to say that ‘running with the hounds AND the fox’ never ever produces a clear understanding of ‘holistic’ or indeed the quality of life as it should be.

Read Jack straw’s letter to Blair dated 25th March 2002 about a year before Iraq was smashed and realise why I dig hard into the catastrophic events that fragmented honour and trust that a growing number of ‘fruitcakes’ are trying to rewrite by bringing to justice those ‘dark actors’ that spoil and abuse the sanctity of life and think they can reinforce their stature by treats, bribes, rip-offs and dodgy arms deals.

Eddie,

YOU are well known to be a loon; I remember you proposing that Noam Chomsky was responsible for as many deaths as Pol Pot.

Eddie,

additionally, I remember your assertion that the Iraq Body Count figure be used as a maximum, when Iraq Body Count themselves explicitly state that it is less than the minimum.

I certainly remember that, back in my days of political involvement in the 1970s, it was routine for committee rooms to ask party workers who were also voters to pay for tea, biscuits, etc. during election campaigns so that there could be no accusation of treating. I don’t know if that still happens.

@ Tom Welsh – ” But how can you prove it objectively? Only by finding people who were treated and who will testify that, in return for the food and drink, Mr Straw personally asked them to vote or not vote in a particular way.”

Answer: Straw certainly did not invite 700 of the constituents to dinner just to have some Indian nosh. So, I guess if you play his after dinner speech, he must have somewhere in it said ” vote for me” – so there – now you have his intention.

Courtenay Barnett: Are you seriously suggesting that, 10 days before a general election, the most decent, principled and Right-Honourable Mr. Straw threw this event with even the vaguest thought that it might be skewed by malicious scandal-merchants as lending a political advantage?

The very notion! Our _very_ dear Mr. Straw is not as cynical as us. No – he wished only to give honest thanks to the party faithful, and had been assured in advance by each and every attendee, that none would be even momentarily predisposed in their vote by this coincidental (but quite agreeable!) nosh-up.

Our _deeply_ principled Mr. Straw would run a mile before even hearing of any event taking place. So clearly nothing of the kind could have possibly happened.

After all, Straw is from the same school of honesty as Blair, who made the assurance – of course he wasn’t lying us into a war. That would have required his lying to parliament, and since that (of course!) could never have happened, is thus proven to have been entirely honest. Ipse dixit.

Right Honourable member from “Glenn” – spoke and Honurable Speaker, if I may…most grateful.

Honourable member stated:-

“After all, Straw is from the same school of honesty as Blair, who made the assurance – of course he wasn’t lying us into a war.”

I offer this Honourable Blogging House my deepest and most sincere apology.

As Sir Cliff Richard might’ve sung:

“Hello eddie, goodbye Larry,

Hello Abe, goodbye St Louis”

Mister Straw believes with every fibre of his being…

That believing in nothing is as good as a hot meal.

Pity the poor man Baha Mousa when you see this horrific image. The UK army thought of Iraqis as ‘scum’.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/27/baha-mousa-inquiry-soldiers

Baha Mousa was just one amongst many hundreds of thousands of human beings in Iraq who were tortured, maimed and killed. The same is happening in Afghanistan.

Nota bene ‘Insert’ Eddie. This is what Straw and your other neocon NuLabour masters have been complicit in.

And btw David Halpin has more humanity in his little finger than you have in your whole being. Cut the ad hominem attacks and try finding out some truths.

PS The criminal Straw is on the box at the moment appearing in Oldham with Brown and Woolas in one of NuLabour’s pathetic last ditch attempts to hang on to power. This is taking place as the international financial collapse continues apace.

Thank you for bringing this to light Craig.

I believe your action against Straw would have more force if you attempted to highlight any other examples of ‘treating’ during this campaign as well.

Currying favour…

Or treating..

Or bribing?

Is there a difference?

No such thing as a free lunch..

Best of luck Craig.

@ eddie

“The provision of food is irrelevant.”

Who is paying for it?

Is it on,ahem,expenses?

Writerman: You wrote:

“…provided free food, for the purpose of corruptly influencing the election…”

You could simply have written:

“…provided free food, for the purpose of influencing the election…”

because that is, by the law’s own definition, corrupt.

No need for tautology here!

Mary makes this statement:

“And btw David Halpin has more humanity in his little finger than you have in your whole being.”

Followed by this statement:

“Cut the ad hominem attacks”

Anyone spot the irony?

” currying favour” – if ever there was a favour curried by Jack, it is this one.

Micky,

But the law against treating doesn’t, according to the version provided by Craig, say that providing food, in itself, under any, or all circumstances, is illegal.

The wording of the law specifically mentions the words for corrupt purposes, that is trying to influence the result in some way, using food a a form of bribe.

The point is, surely, that proving, in a court of law, that Straw intended purposely to corruptly influence the election outcome in Blackburn… using food, a meal, as a form of bribe, is going to be virtually impossible. Whether or not I personally think he was treating anyone is irrelevant.

Glenn/Craig

If a substantial proportion of people invited to this ‘Muslim friends of Labour’ rally weren’t Nulab voters, but were being bribed by a banquet into voting Nulab, by all means get their affidavits and report the matter to the police. But ‘friends of Labour’ certainly sounds like Nulab voters to me.

The question still remains: how come the Lib Dems in Blackburn aren’t so concerned? Perhaps because they share my opinion, that Jack Straw might be guilty of all kinds of things, but provable bribery of electors to vote for him is not one of them!

“The question still remains: how come the Lib Dems in Blackburn aren’t so concerned?”

They could see a legal challenge as bad PR, allowing them to be presented as sore losers.

Jack Straw is a slimy scumbag, and always has been since he knew it would put gold pieces in his pocket.

It just shows how bad things are that people still vote for total charlatans like him.

But they do.

And long ago Jack Straw learnt that he could profit from being a total asswipe cunt.

That’s why he does it. And that’s why the rest of them do it!

Abe

You really are an idiot how many times do you have to be told the offence has nothing to do with bribery the offence is providing food and drinks at election rallies the matter in law is very very very plain stop trying to wriggle for him it matters not a jot that they were friends of nulab they are local people with local votes that were treated to a meal. Bribery is a different law that needs different points to prove. Straw is guilty as sin on this one unfortunately he is untouchable. For all the things wrong with the Met police I am sure if he had done it in London the anti terrorism branch that used to be Special Branch would investigate the complaint.

Councillor Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley

[1][email address]

Our ref: 1577

Dear Councillor Blakesley

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 REQUEST

Thank you for your Freedom of Information Act request which was received

on 23 December 2009. In that request you asked for information about

electoral offences.

Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 creates a statutory right

of access to information held by public authorities i.e. the Crown

Prosecution Service. This right is to be informed whether the information

requested is held by the public authority or not, and if the information

exists, for it to be communicated. A public authority must reply to such a

request promptly and in any event, not later than twenty working days

after receipt.

The individual’s right to information is not unqualified and subject to a

number of exceptions and exemptions that are contained within the Act. The

majority of these exemptions are qualified, that is to say the decision

whether to confirm or deny the information’s existence or to disclose the

requested material, will be subject to a public interest.

The Freedom of Information Act is a public disclosure regime, not a

private regime. Any information disclosed under it is thereafter deemed to

be in the public domain, and therefore freely available to the general

public.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not issue guidance to police

forces in relation to who constitutes a “victim” in the context of

allegations of election offences. The Director of Public Prosecutions (

DPP) or his nominated representative has, by virtue of Section 181 of the

Representation of the People Act 1983 ( the “RPA”), a statutory duty,

where information has been given to him that any offence under that Act

have been committed, to make such inquires and instigate such proceedings

as appears to him to be required. The DPP as head of the CPS exercises

this duty through the CPS. The consent of the Returning Officer in the

relevant local government area or Parliamentary constituency is not

required before proceedings under the RPA are instituted. Whilst

responsibility for such proceedings rests with the CPS, the duty to

investigate allegations of breaches of electoral law, as with any criminal

offence, rests with the police. The Electoral Commission issues guidance

on the prevention and detection of electoral malpractice annually to the

police.

If you are unhappy with the decisions made in relation to your request

from the Crown Prosecution Service you may ask for an internal review

within two calendar months of the date of this letter. If you wish to

request an internal review, please contact the Freedom of Information Unit

(Appeals), 50 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7EX.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have

the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a

decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Seems they have been at it in Birmingham as well.

http://www.birminghampost.net/news/politics-news/2010/04/29/tories-accused-of-dirty-tricks-after-food-row-in-birmingham-erdington-65233-26339028/?

Steve

Verbal abuse will get you nowhere. The fact that other parties haven’t done anything about Straw suggests that the law is not as plain as you make it out to be. What’s more, the most dogmatic comments about “the law” (or ad hominem remarks directed at myself) seem to come from people who are not qualified lawyers. Perhaps an instance of people shouting the more loudly the less qualified they are in a particular field, just like religious fundamentalists.

Actually this dogmatic behaviour is beginning to make me wonder: maybe the Tories are not so bad, even if Nulab deserve to be sent off the field for a season. Maybe I should switch from the LibDems to the Tories if the latter are better for economic progress..

If the police will not do anything then anyone can bring a private prosecution.

Oh my dear Naive Abe

I cant believe that you can tell me that the fact the police wont investigate it tells us the law hasnt been broken. In this corrupt country and even worse a corrupt county in a corrupt country no one is going to investigate the Lord Corruptor himself. I wish I lived in your happy world where everyone is equal and the law is blind. And politicians dont hold the electorate in contempt and call concerned old ladies Bigots behind there backs I wonder if Gordons back room boys are working on the old lady now finding som skeleton in her closet. Stalin and Hitler would be proud of Gordon he controls the state straight out of a 1950 USSR manual. Rule through fear and control indoctinate the youth and crush dissent at all cost. And legislate everyone to submission.Labour are an evil cancer spreading through our once free society choking it to death.

well i agree fully, although i think people should be more focused on arresting war criminals like tony blair, removing the encroachment on our civil liberties by gordon brown or fixing more serious crimes like ted heaths part in sedition as described by albert burgess.