FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

Discuss the sport you love with other motorsport fans

Formula One related discussion.
#392320
If Bernie is found innocent, then German Bloke can surely say "if he did not give a bribe how did I accept one, now let me out of jail your honour."

Sent using NCC-1701
User avatar
By sagi58
#392354
Hey, zurich!! Thanks for weighing in on this discussion. I realize that laws and how they're upheld by court systems would differ from one country to the next, so I was curious whether the Judge's comments would be quoted or not!!
...Oh - and one point of interest that you made Sagi - relating to 'bias' in judges statements / judgments: Currently, judges can say literally anything they want during the course of a trial they are hearing as they have what's known as judicial immunity. Even if the judge has commented with malice that usually wouldn't be enough to make them liable for their words - usually there would have to be evidence of actual corruption (ironic given the subject matter of the trial), and even then it might not be enough. I've been carrying out research on biased judicial statements from judges in court cases since 2007 and am in the process of preparing a paper for publication based on it, hopefully in the next 6 months or so.

So... a Judge is "above the law" when he's sitting in court? WoW!
#392393
from memory (I might be wrong I am sure ZA will say if I am)

Judges are above the law dates back to capitol punishment. So they could not get tried for murder, I suppose unlawful imprisonment if the person is later found innocent.
#392396
Actually, anyone under oath in the witness stand has the same kind of protection. You can say and allege anything about anyone in the stand. You cant be sued for slander if already in court.
#392459
from memory (I might be wrong I am sure ZA will say if I am)

Judges are above the law dates back to capitol punishment. So they could not get tried for murder, I suppose unlawful imprisonment if the person is later found innocent.


There is some logic to that, but it's more to do with that historically, when the King or Queen was more than just a figurehead, that the judge was the direct representative of the sovereign (in Scotland, in criminal trials they are still titled 'HMA vs whomever i.e. Her Majesty's Advocate versus), and the sovereign is above the law.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
#392460
Actually, anyone under oath in the witness stand has the same kind of protection. You can say and allege anything about anyone in the stand. You cant be sued for slander if already in court.


Not quite. There is substantial protection given to witnesses, but only in relation to matters pertaining to the case in question. There is no judicial protection or immunity relating to other matters not relevant to that case. So if somebody implicates themselves relating to some other crime, they can very much still be prosecuted. Likewise of course, lying under oath would lead to perjury charges. And beyond that, if the judge feels that a witness is in some way impeding the smooth administration of justice, then under oath or not, the judge can hold that person in contempt, potentially resulting in a prison sentence in severe cases. So there are a variety of pitfalls for a witness or the accused in the witness stand, but very little (in reality almost none) for any statements made by a judge.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
#392482
From the Independent.

Ecclestone is proving to be homophobic pals with Putin. Must be his age, as Stirling Moss is also tarred with the same far-right brush.

Bernie Ecclestone has said that not only does he "completely agree" with Vladimir Putin’s anti-gay propaganda laws, but that he believes "90 per cent of the world" do too.

In an ill-advised move, the Formula One boss lent his support for Russia’s controversial legislation, which prohibits the publicity of what it calls "homosexual behaviour" in the country.

"He [Putin] hasn't said he doesn't agree [with homosexuality] just that he doesn't want these things publicised to an audience under the age of 18," Ecclestone told CNN in an exclusive interview.

"I completely agree with those sentiments and if you took a world census you'd find 90% of the world agree with it as well."

"I've great admiration for him and his courage to say what he says," the 83-year-old added. "[It] may upset a few people but that's how the world is. It's how he sees [the world] and I think he's completely right."

The legislation, which was introduced last year, caused widespread outrage around the world, especially surrounding the current Sochi Winter Olympic Games, which has so far seen many members of the international sporting community rally together in protest.

Ecclestone's sudden show of support for the leader may have been influenced by his recent contact with the Russian regime. He first met Putin in February of last year when he flew to Sochi to check out the construction progress ahead of Russia’s very first grand prix in the city in October.

The Black Sea location will stage round 16 of this year’s world championship on a circuit that is set to run around the current Olympic Park facilities.

The F1 billionaire is also no stranger to controversy. During the Bahrain Grand Prix in 2012, while pro-democracy protests were being staged, Ecclestone told reporters questioning the ethical issues behind holding the event on the Middle Eastern island: "Go to Syria and write about those things there because it’s more important than here."

Ecclestone is due to face trial in Germany in April charged with making corrupt payments to a banker who worked alongside him on the sale of Formula 1 in 2006. The motorsports mogul denies all charges, as well as those brought against him in a civil case in London. There, he stood accused of undervaluing the sport in connection with the same deal.

He won the civil action in a court case on Thursday. Although his evidence was labelled "not reliable or truthful" by the judge presiding, it was ruled that German company Constantin Medien’s claim for compensation was without merit.

Ecclestone's daughters, Tamara and Petra Ecclestone, were approached by The Independent for comment on whether they agree with their father's views and what sort of impact his opinions could have on the rest of the family. Both, however, declined to comment.
#392483
It is an age thing I am sure. If you think the generation before it was anti blacks, and do on. For the next generation they will try and stop the anti ginger crusade.

Sent using NCC-1701
#392491
Its not just his age, he is properly gone with the fairies (no pun intended) This is a guy who has said in all seriousness that he admires Hitler and that there was not much wrong with him. I ll bet he thinks gays can be cured by having treatment and that black footballers cant play in the cold and that strikers should be shot on the streets to set an example
#392646
If you ignore the major atrocities that Hitler caused. The fact that he rallied his country into going to war with everyone and everything is an amazing feat of leadership. His biggest problem following that was he surrounded himself with yes men (or people who were to scared to say no to him)

Let's face it I struggle to ralligh SWMBO to make me a sandwich

Sent using NCC-1701
#392648
You have to separate circumstance and greatness. The guy was like a cult leader who was at the right place at the right time. There are tons of would be evil and incompetent guys like him who could have done the same given the turn of fate to be around at that place at that time.
The guy was a terrible leader of men, a disastrous military strategist and not that clever but if
You looking for a real evil tyrant who was 10 times smarter, look at Stalin. No romantic crap about a master race (who didnt have a history of monumental stuff like the pyramids or Roman monuments) Stalin didnt care if they were jewish, gay, black, whatever, he used them and then killed after to make sure. He even killed all his officers and middle classes to prevent them standing up to him.
I mean how thick does a military leader have to be to gas his best nuclear weapons workers? Stalin would have had them building the bomb.
Nope Hitler was not just evil - killing millions for a pretend story, he was also really dumb. Stalin was seriously evil but more ruthless and clever, and he was also a terrible military commander but at least smart enough to know that and leave it to his general staff
No one who knows history and knows about these guys can say they were anything other than inhuman in their evilness. Only a seriously stunted mind could romanticise and say they were not just regular cancers that were allowed by fate to grow too big.
But its idiots like Bernie and weak minded lazy thinkers who will start romanticising these guys and before you know it a guy like that Brevik will be elected in somewhere and change the laws to become untouchable and then go on another evil and dumb idea rampage

And finally to prove Hitler was not a good leader of men but just a cult leader at the right place at right time to implement a dumb idea, he didnt actually do much leading, he just installed a bunch of lackies and let them fight each other to impress him, even if they won the war the system would have imploded into civil war after his death because he had no idea about succession or strategy. Stalin on the other hand, even after his death his structure survived for 50 years without working.

It completely naive to credit Hitler with anything commendable. It would be like idolising Brevik because he was neatly dressed

See our F1 related articles too!