Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[News] Is This THE Best Good News Day Ever?



A mex eyecan

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2011
3,877
BJ says he’s sorry … he’s only sorry about being caught out …. again. you know he really isn’t that bright is he
 




Creaky

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2013
3,862
Hookwood - Nr Horley
‘Best Good News Day Ever?”

I think I’ll wait until the day BJ resigns, Djokovic is deported and there is a verdict against Prince Andrew.

Until then it all remains ‘as you were’.
 




Jul 20, 2003
20,681
This. A few red faces and some fake contrition. Bluster and sort of aplogise but not really. Repeat until people leave you alone to continue profiting from breaking the law.


The new apology ... I'm sorry if anyone has been offended by my actions
 
















Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,122
Faversham
Not even as big as that. It was more;

“I apologise if you think we did anything wrong. We didn’t. Thanks”.

He ain’t going anywhere.

I apologise for people making a judgement that I may, correctly or not, have done something wrong.
 


A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
20,545
Deepest, darkest Sussex
I must say I’m hugely in favour of the 2022 trend of twats getting their comeuppance and hope it continues. Awful lot of them to go.
 




GT49er

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Feb 1, 2009
49,186
Gloucester
I find the Andrew decision a strange one. She got half a million bucks from Epstein on the understanding she didn't sue him or anyone connected to him. Now the judge has overturned it with a 46 page decision. He must have had to go all round the legal houses to find a way to overturn the agreement if it took 46 pages to explain how he did it.
Of course, Andrew should face justice if he's done anything wrong.

I agree. Regardless of the rights or wrongs of Andrew's conduct I find the judges ruling perverse. If the formal agreement was that if she accepted half a million bucks that would exempt all possible defendants from future action, to apparantly rule that the word 'all' does not include Andrew because it doesn't specifically mention him by name looks batshit mental.
 












The Clamp

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jan 11, 2016
26,187
West is BEST
I agree. Regardless of the rights or wrongs of Andrew's conduct I find the judges ruling perverse. If the formal agreement was that if she accepted half a million bucks that would exempt all possible defendants from future action, to apparantly rule that the word 'all' does not include Andrew because it doesn't specifically mention him by name looks batshit mental.

Protection for alleged traffickers, not alleged rapists. I suppose Andrew could claim he was a sex trafficker and not a rapist. Not a great look either though.
 


Bry Nylon

Test your smoke alarm
Helpful Moderator
Jul 21, 2003
20,575
Playing snooker
I suppose Andrew could claim he was a sex trafficker and not a rapist. Not a great look either though.

:lolol: Inspired!

Lawyer: “There’s good news your Highness, and bad news.”
Andrew: “What’s the good news?”
Lawyer: “We believe we may have found a way to get you off on a technicality.”
Andrew: “At last! What’s the bad news?”
Lawyer: “Er, let me hand over to my colleague Mr Clamp…”
 




The Clamp

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jan 11, 2016
26,187
West is BEST
:lolol: Inspired!

Lawyer: “There’s good news your Highness, and bad news.”
Andrew: “What’s the good news?”
Lawyer: “We believe we may have found a way to get you off on a technicality.”
Andrew: “At last! What’s the bad news?”
Lawyer: “Er, let me hand over to my colleague Mr Clamp…”

:lolol:
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here