Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

There had been evidence put to a US court. Mr Durham, was indicted on 13 counts of fraud and money laundering by a grand jury in Greenbelt, Maryland, in December 2011, while his 57-year-old wife was accused of aiding and abetting him. There has been due process and they seem to have ignored the court case. I have followed this now and again and it looks like an attempt to generate lots of publicity to escape justice. Their solicitor seems to be milking the situation. It is a bit rich to start moaning about leaving their two beloved dogs. There is no evidence that they will be imprisoned awaiting trial. They seem to be trying the mental illness tactic to avoid it all.

Looking further into the case, I found that the indictment was the result of an FBI investigation.

goldiie,

Alders sorry for late reply

Been trying to get a bit of gardening done myself , but the soil is still a little wet.Like to grow my own fruit and veg

Clifford guilty, sentence Friday

Publicist Max Clifford is found guilty of eight indecent assaults on women and girls as young as 15.

Appeal?

1. There had been evidence put to a US court. Mr Durham, was indicted on 13 counts of fraud and money laundering by a grand jury in Greenbelt, Maryland, in December 2011, while his 57-year-old wife was accused of aiding and abetting him.

The couple, not living in the USA at the time, were only made aware of the charges in November 2012 when they were contacted by officers from Scotland Yard.

2. There has been due process and they seem to have ignored the court case.

Correct.
They were not aware of it and therefore at the time, were not able to prepare any defence or other preparation for it. In any event, the charges seem to be about expense claims, whilst in the employment of a US company. These expenses were signed off by: the owner of the company, the finance director of the company, the company's statutory auditors. There is strong opinion that the matter should be a civil problem and not a criminal problem.

Also, it is generally felt, that the charges have been brought about by malicious and mischievous accusation by the then owners son. At the time, Paul Dunham was recruited to be CEO and moved over from the UK to do this job, and obviously with a generous relocation expenses package. The son was miffed about not getting the CEO's job and left. The father died. The son inherited and decided to come back. Paul Dunham felt it was impossible to work for the son and left, going back to the UK.

3. I have followed this now and again and it looks like an attempt to generate lots of publicity to escape justice.

You betcha! But I don't call it 'justice'. Please read on...

4. Their solicitor seems to be milking the situation.

Hmmm? I think he is acting well for his clients,the Dunhams, and thankfully for them, is trying everything in the book that he can think of. Mr Dunham's father is footing the bill.

5. It is a bit rich to start moaning about leaving their two beloved dogs.

Agreed. So......let's think for a while about what to do with their home, their clothes and other possessions, their grandchildren, their aged father. Should they put their possessions in storage? How should they pay the bill? Who cuts the lawn? Should they rent out their home? Can they? It's mortgaged to the hilt. And for how long? Or maybe sell it?

6. There is no evidence that they will be imprisoned awaiting trial.

Should they be extradited, Mr and Mrs Dunham say they have warned they will be held in separate (male and female) 'Supermax' US jails for up to two years before their trial takes place. During this time, having no funds, having spent all of their money on legalities thus far, and now, since they are now bankrupt, they have to find and fund a US lawyer and prepare a defence.

7. They seem to be trying the mental illness tactic to avoid it all.

If they didn't have mental illness before, I dare bet my £5 that they damn well do now. They haven't even had any kind of a response from either the Home Secretary, who doesn't appear to deal with US Extradition any longer. ????? (And neither is she helpful or polite enough to compose any kind of a reply!)

Let's just suppose it is actually a malicious mischievous charge brought by the son of the founder, to get even with the Dunhams, for siding with the old man against him, thereby getting him ousted from the company.

Well, it is NOT JUSTICE to be forcibly take to a foreign country, the USA, under 'terrorism-type extradition jurisdictory criteria' and locked up, to be forcibly separated from your wife, home, possessions, dogs, family, WITHOUT AT LEAST BEING GIVEN SOME KIND OF AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND YOURSELF.

Wonder they haven't found anythink on Benny Hill , one of the girls on the show's said he use to ask for a BJ , and she gave him one. Think it was said on a BBC program, mainly it was about who had his money when he died

Here's a Statement from Paul Dunham giving evidence in relation to his extradition proceedings:

http://www.friends-extradited.org/_filestore/Dunham_p_proof_of_evidence_19-04-13.pdf

Their mental illness appears to be depression and the cause of it is said to be the court case. I just read the transcript of the High Court case to deny extradition it looks like they should be going back. He was the President and CEO of the company in the US. The charges relate to $1.7m of fraud that was investigated and then the FBI was involved. They were aware of the court case in the US and did not respond to it or go back to stand trial. Subsequent to that an arrest warrant was issued to which they did not respond. It is normal practice to issue extradition warrents without warning as the subject might flee. They have had their chance of fighting the extradition in the High Court after previous hearings. The warrents seem to be in order and nothing seems to be any different to other extradition requests. Send them back.

I have already read his statement. It is just his version of events and evidence to be used in a trial that he is trying to avoid. If a company here had a CEO accused of fraud and the SFOvwas involved, we would seem extradition from the US or any other country that we had an extradition with. This case looks to be no different. A stay Kent by someone is just that. It may be the truth or an attempt to avoid justice.

He he, briliant fair tickled me............

Could the truth be stranger than Esther McVey’s Wikipedia entry?
27
Sunday
Apr 2014
Posted by Mike Sivier in Conservative Party, People, Politics



It appears that somebody with a social conscience has edited Esther McVey’s Wikipedia entry to provide what some might call a more accurate description of her Parliamentary responsibilities.

For a short period earlier today, it seems the entry began: “Esther Louise McVey (born 24 October 1967) is a British Conservative Party politician who has been the Member of Parliament (MP) for Wirral West since 2010, and the Assistant Grim Reaper for Disabled People since 2012, second only to Iain Duncan Smith. She was previously a television presenter and businesswoman before deciding to branch out into professional lying and helping disabled people into the grave.” [Italics mine]

The edits have since been erased but at the time of writing, the entry starts: “Esther “no brains” McVey (born 24 October 1767)”.

Also embarrassing for the Employment Minister is the section on her Twitter faux pas during the memorial service on the 25th anniversary of the Hillsborough disaster (April 15 this year). It reads: “McVey was criticized by social media users for attacking the Wirral Labour Group in a tweet published at the time a memorial service for the Hillsborough Disaster was being held at Anfield Stadium. She later, in a radio interview with BBC Radio Merseyside, claimed to regret the mistiming of her communication. During this interview, a voice can clearly be heard whispering, ‘Say I didn’t send it’.”

Addendum: Apparently another edit has appeared on Wikipedia as follows (thanks to our friends on Twitter for providing this):

Hays Hays Hays............

electionista @electionista ·
UK - YouGov #EP2014 poll:

UKIP 31%
LAB 28
CON 19
LD 9
GRN 8

We will see. The Polks taken based on those certain to vote and those who voted last time give a different picture.

The only poll that matters is the GE next year and that looks to be very different.

i think that's a fair comment
i'm certain ukip will have a stonking result at the eu polls, and perhaps even in local elections, but the general election is likely to throw up a very different picture

Yep a labour outright majority.

Easter polls are notorious for getting it wrong.

This one is the last reliable one you can trust........

electionista @electionista · Apr 24
UK - YouGov/Sun poll:

CON 32%
LAB 38%
LDEM 8%
UKIP 14%

And dont forget Hays we have AXLEgrease starting work for labour from next monday.


Im afraid he'l take linton Crosby to the cleaners.

Shrewd ED at work again.

meanwhile, max clifford facing a very uncomfortable few years

sticky - i just walked past a newsstand and noticed today's lead headline from The Times

Labour's core vote hit hard by UKIP


obviously this must be about the eu elections and i have no idea about the rest of the of the article, but any thoughts or comment?