Oh, so that makes it all alright then... You know, the fact that he only thieved a smaller amount than he could have.... :rolleyes: Oh, come ONNNNN dude, you really are stretching it here with this.... Is it the fact that he's a fellow Lib Demmer, you feel you have to defend the bloke...? Oh, and he's gay too, so, we shouldn't come down too hard on a member of a persecuted minority, even IF they're doing something fraudulent and illegal... Oh, fukk that sh!t, a crook is a crook, I dont care WHO they're boneing in their private lives, I DO care that they're bloody well boneing the public and then telling us that we have to tighten OUR belts and tolerate spending cuts to universities, etc..... -_-

You've missed the point - not for the first time. If he had claimed on his Yeovil home there wouldn't have been a problem at all. He would have made a perfectly legitimate claim for a larger sum of money. In my view, he should have made his London address his main home at the point where the other man became more than just his landlord. I can understand why he didn't - something I doubt you've bothered trying to do in your usual eagerness to jump to instant judgement. That doesn't make him right, just not the hardened criminal you seem to think he is.

 

Would I have said the same if he was straight? Of course I would. OTOH, unless he was a married man having an affair with his landlady, the issue may well not have arisen in the first place.

[quote name='Suedehead2' date='May 29 2010, 04:08 PM' post='3086436'

In my view, he should have made his London address his main home at the point where the other man became more than just his landlord. I can understand why he didn't - something I doubt you've bothered trying to do in your usual eagerness to jump to instant judgement. That doesn't make him right, just not the hardened criminal you seem to think he is.

 

 

 

So, he's done wrong regardless, full stop, there's no "ifs", "ands" or "buts" (as the Govt ad campaings against Benefits Fraudsters say -_- ) as far as I'm concerned, how forgiving has the system Laws represents been towards working class people who fiddle the dole, refuse to pay Council Tax rises in protest of misappropriation of funds...? Not very... And most of the people targeted in this manner are hardly hardened criminals either... And yet the fact remains that the working class fraudsters and tax avoiders are ending up in court a hell of a lot more often than the "white collar" crims... Just a slight imbalance there...

 

As for the second part, well all that says to me is that he even lacks the backbone to come out to his parliamentary colleagues and say "yes, I AM sleeping with this guy, he IS my partner now and not my landlord...". The facts are, if he'd been a bit more honest the whole thing would never have arisen... He skillfully avoided the first round-up of cheaters by not being forthcoming, you say it's it was merely happenstance, sorry, I dont buy that... Anyway, the bloke was a merchant banker before he was an MP, he made quite a bit of money from all accounts, so, err, why exactly does he even need to claim expenses at all if he's well off in his private life...? Monkey see, monkey do is it? Everyone else is boneing the taxpayer, so why not me? I suppose if they were all jumping off Tower Bridge he'd've done the same..... -_-