LibDem Backer Guilty - Judge Says "Jail Him"
Appearing at Southwark Crown Court, Michael Brown admitted committing perjury and making a false declaration to obtain a passport. Brown also faces other fraud charges involving the HSBC bank.Judge Geoffrey Rivlin QC suggested the LibDem's biggest backer will face a jail sentence when he is sentenced on 25 September. He has been on remand in Wormwood Scrubs for months.
Maybe he'll get to talk at some date about the future of political financing with Lord Levy. The not too distant future...
31 comments:
Cue some idiot saying "I'm no lawyer, but I think this means every Lib Dem voter has to go prison too" or similar drivel.
It might be his (Asil) nadir, but precedent suggests it isn't going to affect the Libs.
You have to pity Milord Levy dont you?
He has two choices , stay here and potentialy take the rap for Holy Tony or sit in Tel Aviv waiting for the Katyusas to start raining down ,Maybe Alvin Stardust could offer him a hideout.
Shame he isnt being sentenced until 25th Sept - the week after the (last?) Lib Dem Conference
Iain Dale beat you to the post; you can expect the same LibDem anonymongs here shortly, with the same drivel about flogging dead horses etc…
Cue some anonymong LibDim saying "Cue some idiot saying "I'm no lawyer, but I think this means every Lib Dem voter has to go prison too" or similar drivel."
Ever heard of due diligence? Proceeds of crime? Honour? Don't suppose you have - that would explain why your electioneering is so dishonest and unprincipled...
I would never have trusted him. It's the beard. Most people who practice topiary with their facial hair are a bit suspect.
Before you ask, I've had a full set since about 1970. Except of course for the times, where I had bad facial dandruff.
Does he wear sandals too?
His biggest worry will be that the US decides upon a whim and absolutely no prima facie evidence whatsoever that they want to prosecute him for something. Actually, the way things are going, being Liberal is probably cause enough for the current US administration. Or any of us Brits who dissents from the Spineless One's world view.
bet the judge throws the book at him for the 'lack of judgement' section of the tarrif.
Is he married ? He looks a bit like Mark Oaten.
The only thing of which Lib Dem voters are guilty is being misguided. Anyway, there won't be a Lib Dem party after repayment the £2.4 million donation...
Nice to see the goody goody two shoes Lib-Dems with a nice piece of sleaze to deal with.
Hmm, maybe him and Levy can discuss the pros and cons of their actions over a bar of soap.
"Cue some idiot saying "I'm no lawyer, but I think this means every Lib Dem voter has to go prison too" or similar drivel."
The Lib Dems would only enjoy it. lets make them pay the money back to HSBC instead.
Can't comment on the prospects of imprisoning Lib Dem voters (having people sectioned for lunacy isn't my area) - much more interesting is what happens to the money.
IF Brown has made donations to the LDs in circumstances where PPERA says they are not permissible then:
* Treasurer of the LDs is on risk of prosecution for making a false donation report to the Electoral Commission (PPERA section 66)
* Treasurer of the LDs and the LD party as a whole are on risk of prosecution for failing to return the donation within 30 days (PPERA section 56)
* Electoral Commission can seek a civil court order against the LDs for forfeiture of "an amount equal to the value of the donation" (PPERA section 58)
Coming soon to a street corner near you: Ming the Busker.
Doesn't everyone make a false eclaration to get a passport ? The photographs are usually a "false declaration" of appearance
Whatever happened to Asil Nadir?
William norton, you know damned well that it is no more likely that the Electoral Commission will do any souch thing than it is they will collectively stick their head in a mincer. They've been through all these issues long since and determined that there is nothing to answer.
As for Andrew's comment;
"that would explain why your electioneering is so dishonest and unprincipled... ",.... I presume he is claiming that some party or other has been teaching themselves from his postings here?
Mr Anonymous 4.15pm said: William norton, you know damned well that it is no more likely that the Electoral Commission will do any souch thing than it is they will collectively stick their head in a mincer. They've been through all these issues long since and determined that there is nothing to answer.
No, I don't know that at all. What I do know is that the Electoral Commission issued a statement on 25th May which read: "Following discussions with the City of London Police, the Electoral Commission has decided to await the outcome of the police investigation of the financial affairs of 5th Avenue Partners Limited and its director before considering further whether 5th Avenue Partners Limited's donations to the Liberal Democrats last year met the tests for donations to political parties by companies."
see: http://www.electoralcommission.gov.uk/media-centre/newsreleasedonations.cfm/news/554
Nice try, Mr Anonymous, but you seem to have confused a pause in the investigation with a clean bill of health. Care to have another go?
I'm ashamed that a fellow Ulsterman thinks this will mean our last Lib Dem conference this year. Judging by the financial states of the various parties we will have no problem surviving even in the worst case scenario.
However if the Levy situation takes things to inside number 10 Brown's sentencing might just come in the week of the wind-down the Labour party conference.
My God he's an ugly bastard.
At least Mikey Levy (despite being a munchkin) knew how to dress, had fairly decent hair and access to a razor.
Mr Norton, you seem to have confused 'police investigations' with trial. The police investigations into Brown's company were concluded months since. Brown is a crook, but the issues of what the Lib Dem HQ personnel did to check out his money is a seperate matter. There are serious limits as to what one is able to do in this regard and the requirements of the law in this respect are pretty minimal.
Asil Nadir is still in exile in Northern Cyprus, living with the widow of the late, great Francis Urquhart.
King of swing...and raised heeled shoes...I wonder if Levy hasd raised heeled tennis shoes?
I believe the Lib Dem party are going to hold a series of Car Boot Sales, throughout the country,in an effort to raise money!
Mark Oaten's car will be interesting!
On the subject of American justice - to be prosecuted for a serious crime, an indictment has to be handed down by a Grand Jury (mostly).
It is very interesting to note the number of people who declare that there was no case against the Nat West 3 - and then send them here -
http://www.usdoj.gov/dag/cftf/chargingdocs/berminghamindictment.pdf
The moral of this story is to try not to commit too many conspiracies to defraud in the US.
The list of those who opposed the extradition strongly is an interesting one. Methinks a search through the archives of Private Eye might reveal a
somewhat personal motive for many of them... i.e. they are next.
Given the crowing about how British regulation is so much more *business friendly* than the US, and the type of buisness that is heading this way as a result, I would expect the really major frauds to start appearing in about 2 years....
He looks a bit like Gary Glitter,similar career prospects as well.
I don't get it. This chap is charged with committing fraud in Britain against HSBC. Why is he being tried here instead of being extradited to Shanghai or Texas or somewhere?
I believe the Lib Dem party are going to hold a series of Car Boot Sales, throughout the country,in an effort to raise money!
That's correct. You know we could it do as well.
he looks like he's built like a sh*t brickhouse....why the lib dems?
He seemed to think he'd get a say in how things were run, and threw a hissyfit on the Today programme when he realised he didn't.
they were planning to use him as Mark Oatens' body double - unfortunately Mark hit his glass ceiling with the weight training and dropped out of the leadership contest for some inexplicable reason anyway.
Ming the merciless was on the Today programme and said nobody in the libdems had ever heard of Michel Brown.
No matter what the LD trolls say on this blog or anywhere else, it is still entirely possible that the Electoral Commission will decide that the donation was not permissible and demand the repayment. Remember, the investigation is still ongoing, just stayed pending the outcome of litigation against Mr Brown (of which there is still more to come).
It does look VERY questionable as to whether either of Michael Brown's companies have ever 'traded' in the UK and both look a lot like front companies with nothing more than a legal address. Given the size of the donation and the knowledge that the donor was not UK-resident, the party should have made more detailed checks on his status before accepting the cheque - but then every party's eyes would light up if that sort of offer came their way.
Anonymous at 6.08pm said: Mr Norton, you seem to have confused 'police investigations' with trial....There are serious limits as to what one is able to do in this regard and the requirements of the law in this respect are pretty minimal.
I'm not confusing anything. I'm reading section 58 of PPERA which says that if a registered party receives a prohibited donation from someone then the Electoral Commission can seek a court order for the money to be forfeited. You (and/or the Lib Dems) might try reading it yourself some time. Nothing to do with the police, but a nice simple question of fact: did the Lib Dems receive the cash; does Brown qualify as a permissible donor? Allowing for a few pleasantries, finishing morning cup of coffee, removing fluff from barristers' wigs, they should be in and out of the court in about half an hour.
I grant you that the quality of the due diligence (or otherwise) would go to the question of the personal liability for criminal charges of the Treasurer of the Lib Dems, and the party itself (see cited law above) - but that's just icing on the cake.
And even if the Commission decide - incredibly - to take no action there remains the question of whether the cash was purloined by Brown from someone else. His admissions of guilt might be relevant here, do you think? If the money wasn't Brown's to give then it isn't the Lib Dems' to keep, so they are only holding it on trust for whoever is the rightful owner - i.e. they will have to give it back at some point.
Rather than waste time posting irrelevant messages here, some of our Anonymous friends would be better off selling raffle tickets - but do remember to check whether you need a license for that, won't you?
Post a Comment