Gordon Brown Be My Angel
Bit late for Halloween, but TB has watched this twice now and is still in a state of shock:
Do not watch this if you are eating or have coffee anywhere near you.
Monday, 2 November 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Videos
Contact Tory Bear
TBtv Archive
Tory Bear Feed
Posts
Comments
Badges
2009
Number 8
Number 5
2008
Number 76
Number 35
Number 17
Wikio:
19 comments:
ROFL
"Caring in the community"
Christ almighty. Anyone for a parody? "Gordon Brown, in your bunker, throwing nokias against the wall, Gordon Brown, do us a favour, call an election pronto"...
Whatever happened to Eva Jo Frogster it must have been very traumatic indeed for nothing else could explain this truly bizarre clip. Speechless, totally speechless.
WTF? I can't of anything else that can be said.
I...
I...
I am completely lost for words (which is unusual for me...)!
Gordon Brown, Gordon Brown
An alternative, alternative Edelweiss
Gordon Brown, Gordon Brown,
Why does everyone hate you?
Inept, a blight, plans are shite,
Lies; the charges against you.
Bringer of woe, take your gloom and go,
Gloom and go forever.
Gordon Brown, Gordon Brown
Take you plague and leave us forever.
@ Startled Cod, completely amazing and very funny!
That was ... interesting.
The original YouTube video is in the 'Comedy' category which makes me hope it's satire (in which case it's bloody good!) but based on Eva's comments she seems a genuine madwoman.
I kinda figured out what she's on about.
Apparently, she has been sexually assaulted/raped (no details are told, and, frankly, I don't passionately want to hear, either). Her case is that there has been no consent to the intercourse because of fraud/deception. Which, true, is a bit of an obscure area of the law, given that deception does negate consent, but there is wide debate as to what degree of deception negates consent, and what the deception has to 'go to' (e.g. there is a strong case that deceiving a woman into believing you're her long-lost husband should negate consent while deceiving her into believing that you have lots of money when you're actually a skint student shouldn't - as I said, lots of legal policy involved). She relies heavily on Jonathan Herring, criminal/family law prof at Oxford (and incidentally one of my teachers back in the day), who espouses a rather broad view of what counts as deception negating consent. So far, so good.
Apparently, it looks like the CPS is unwilling/unable to prosecute - again, this is a massively convoluted issue. The CPS has an extremely wide discretion who to prosecute, and a lot of first-rate crooks get off because the CPS does not prosecute. That being said, the CPS administers limited public resources (directly people, time and money; indirectly court time), so it has to make this little balancing act.
Where it gets interesting is that she expects a solution from Parliament and Gordon Brown. None of these can give that solution to her (least of all Parliament). It is possible to seek review of a decision not to prosecute, but that - like all of English judicial review - is rather limited. I also don't see Herring's argument (however brilliant and influential he is) winning this case for her when there is substantial disagreement on the issue.
(oh and I'm just trying to convey the picture I managed to piece together - I'm not Eva Jo Frogster, I don't know her, and I'm not in any way authorised to speak on her behalf - for the avoidance of doubt, I'm not making any statements about the substantive merits of the case, either)
Surely you forgot to take your pills today or you couldn't have coped with watching this.
Well, let me just say that I am making a new cup of tea after laughing and coughing my other cup all over the desk.
Gordon Brown an Angel. Of the Devil, perhaps.
oh dear god.
Listen to “THE OUTLAW GORDON BROWN” on youtube
https://www.youtube.com/thisisjohnnyblack#play/uploads/7/w66ywNA8Vpc
I received 2 letters from 10 Downing Street,
my letter to Gordon Brown reads like this:
Dear Mr Gordon Brown,
Following your thank-you note to me dated xth July 2009, I wish to point to the meaning of my song “Gordon Brown be my Angel” which is the contradiction between my status as a victim of the sexual offence of procuring women by false pretenses (it has been illegal in Britain since 124 years ago, the guideline for sentencing is 2 years of imprisonment) and being expected to produce over £60,000 to prosecute the xx-year-old man for his deeds in a private prosecution, money that of course I do not have as a young and ordinary British citizen. This arrangement for prosecuting is entirely unrealistic and public safety is being undermined because of it, so it clearly needs to be changed. I am also by no means the only victim of this sexual offence from recent years. Your friend from Edinburgh University, Miss Katriana H****** whom you lived with for one year as a university student, has had the misfortune of knowing the man well from working at *******. She has been made aware of ********* procure women by false pretenses from an incident in late January 2009, although the 2 ladies ****** detail. My witnesses include all 3 of them, and many more, and there is also a large pile of documentary evidence to prove the occurrence of events.
Even though I have called you “an angel” in my campaigning song “Gordon Brown be my Angel”, I wish to make it clear that it does not imply Parliamentary help from you would be a bonus and a matter of generosity- something that is nice to do if the Prime Minister has the time in his busy life. It is fundamentally a necessity for the House of Commons to overcome these issues, whether it involves the Head of the Commons or not! Please refer to Rt. Hon. Stephen Timms for the details. I wish you a pleasant time at Parliament. Please excuse the noise when I sing the song at Parliament Square soon!
Eva (surname witheld)
And this letter was to Right Honourable Stephen Timms MP dated 1 October 2009:
It is still fundamentally important for me to prosecute Mr ********* for the sexual offence of procuring women by false pretenses. The main issue that I want to tell you about in this letter is that it is still cheaper for the state to prosecute this xx-year-old imposter than not to prosecute him. The experts estimate that people with anti-social personality disorder ie. sociopathy cost $50,000 USD of public funds per year. It was Jack Westman who, in 1994, calculated that the typical sociopath was costing $50,000 each year, taking into account of costs incurred in the expense of juvenile corrections, policing, costs of trials, imprisonment costs and so forth. Presumably this sum excludes the cost of dealing with issues that fall unto the loopholes of the legal system. But from reading a lot of psychology books about personality disorders, I have obtained the analysis that Mr ****** is on the severe end of the severity continuum of anti-social personality order, taking into account of the detailed descriptions of pathological lying and manipulative behaviour, which means that he is expected to bring greater devastation to human lives than the average sociopath and is expected to cost more than $50,000 per year, this is £31,240 pounds per year.
The UK population is currently at 60,943,912 people. 3-4 % of the population are sociopathic. Assuming that 3.5% of the population are sociopathic, these sociopaths cost £66,636,073,380 of the British taxpayers’ money each year. Sometimes money is spent combating sociopathic fraud- financial fraud, sometimes police officers deal with the consequences of a sexual assault when the offender is an utterly remorseless sociopath (severe superego deficiency).
Mr XXXXX is currently ** years old, with a history of theft and his 4 convictions from the past 10 years don’t seem to have protected society sufficiently, unfortunately. Assuming that his anti-social personality disorder started costing public money from the age of 18, to multiply it by £31,240 per year, he has already cost £812,240 of tax. Oh my goodness. You can buy x houses with that money. This is only a conservative estimate; if he costs 20% more because he is on the severe end of the severity continuum of anti-social personality disorder, then he has already cost £974,688 of public funds. All of this money has already been sucked up and it is expected that the human costs of sociopathic manipulation have been staggering. It only costs 10% of this amount of money for the state to prosecute this man for what he did to me- I do have very numerous witnesses and a substantial body of convincing documentary evidence to proof what has happened. One cannot guarantee that a prosecution will be successful, but we must make educated guesses and have faith in the law which was produced in the first place to protect society.
If you and the House of Commons do nothing and leave this sociopath and pathological narcissist lurking around in society, in a 2-year period he will cost £74,976 (and also probably ruin many prosperous lives) ...........
Eva (surname witheld)
Eva Jo, whle I sympathise, I wouldn't hold out too much hope on Gordon becoming your angel.
He's just as much the shagger as yours, but he's managed to fuck over the whole country.
Startled Cod-Who is the real liar? Get a job.