http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15660023
He is in big trouble - several people have testified that he did not tell the truth to the committee last time. I think he really underestimated how powerful these committees can be.
Chat Forum
Murdoch - will they nail his hide to the floor this time?
-
Posted 6 months ago #
-
will they nail his hide to the floor this time?
will they ****Posted 6 months ago # -
its only a committee - its not a court of law. The job of the committee its to inform themselves and debate things. If he's shown to have lied then he's not going to get flung in jail - it'll just be apparent that he lied.
Posted 6 months ago # -
They have the theoretical power to jail him ( not used for a very long time) - and he can be prosecuted on what he says infront of them can he not?
Posted 6 months ago # -
But realisitically, would he be? I'd bet against. Worst likely outcome for him would be that he'd have to resign from his job if he was clearly shown to have lied - or more importantly maybe, if the public believed that he knew, particularly about the Milly Dowler-type more emotive incidents.
More likely, it won't be completely clear cut that he lied and the X-factor or something else more interesting will come along and most people will forget about it and the connection to the Murdoch empire that they give their money to.
Posted 6 months ago # -
He'll avoid, divert, deny, shift blame, slime & weasel his way through it.
Posted 6 months ago # -
D0NK - Member
will they nail his hide to the floor this time?
will they ****Exactly..
Posted 6 months ago # -
TJ: bit touch and go as to sanctions really being available for any contempt.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/14/rupert-murdoch-jail-refusal-mpsPosted 6 months ago # -
Dobbo - Member
He'll avoid, divert, deny, shift blame, slime & weasel his way through it.
No difference from the last time then
I would love to see the committee grow some & give him a xmas behind bars that he would never forget
Posted 6 months ago # -
I think you're underestimating the real pressure James Murdoch in particular, is in over this whole affair. He's pissed off a lot of people, who will take great delight in contributing to his downfall. He's been gunning for the BBC for years, so I'd be pretty confident they'll make sure it keeps getting reported for as long as possible.
There's also a lot of dissatisfaction with his performance inside the company - that was clear at their last AGM, and it's hard to see how someone can keep going when you're being made constantly aware of how much of a tool the world at large thinks you are.
Posted 6 months ago # -
I think that the Murdochs should be thinking about what happens when they're forced to resign from their empire by the shareholders, which is looking more and more likely, and nice
Australian(oops) American Rupes should be getting concerned about his interfering with Police phones immediately after 9/11 which has the possibility of getting Fox's license to rebroadcast rescinded.Posted 6 months ago # -
Bit more aggressive this time isn't he.
The slimy little liar.
When's the piechucker due?
Posted 6 months ago # -
When's the piechucker due?
lol round two, my money is on his Mrs
Posted 6 months ago # -
Indeed Stoner - we are in uncharted territory here really.
that bit you refer to never came to a head because in the end they attended.
I think up until then they had thought the committee toothless and then realised it wasn't - but still underestimated the power it could wield by lying infront of it.
I doubt he will be sanctioned but its a possibility.
Posted 6 months ago # -
nothing will happen to him (wake up)
Posted 6 months ago # -
Like being savaged by a dead sheep. Did he resist the temptation to openly and contemptuously yawn at them?
Posted 6 months ago # -
FFS when's it pie time??
I'd pie him for his annoying whiney voice alone never mind over use of the word proactive.
He should have to wrestle the guy in glasses to the death. That would be better TV.
Posted 6 months ago # -
From BBC News
MP Tom Watson to James Murdoch: "You must be the first mafia boss in history who didn't know he was running a criminal enterprise"
Classic.
When we find any issues here, as part of the fix we always ask "how did this come about", "how did we find out about it" and "how do we know it's not a wider problem" - surely questions that would (or should) be asked when signing off out-of-court settlements for very large sums of money.
It's hard to know whether not knowing (which smacks of incompetence), or knowing and at the least not acting (which smacks of complicity) is worse. Murdoch would have been history at any other plc months ago over this.
Posted 6 months ago # -
oooohh he admitted that he may close the sun down if they were implicated too
what would all the thick people read?
Posted 6 months ago # -
what would all the thick people read?
STW forum?Posted 6 months ago # -
TVQuick?
Posted 6 months ago # -
Jeepers! They can't shut The Sun down. Imagine if all their readers started 'reading' the Daily Wail instead? That would be a national disaster
Posted 6 months ago # -
Murdoch said while it was a "matter of great regret" that "things went wrong" at the newspaper, when evidence had come to light "we acted.. I think with great zeal and diligence to get to the bottom of issues to improve the processes to make sure they didn't happen again".
Does he think anyone will buy this crock?
If daddy was not boss and sacking him did not impact in ruperts position he would not be there.
Take your pick Liar or incompetentPosted 6 months ago # -
The job of the committee is to inform themselves and debate things.
Perhaps someone should remind them of this; they (still) seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that their job is to try and make themselves look smart with cheap points scoring and pithy one-liners.
If they were a bit more focused perhaps they'd actually make some progress...
Posted 6 months ago # -
oooohh he admitted that he may close the sun down if they were implicated too
what would all the thick people read?
You think all Sun readers are thick ? A substantial proportion of Sun readers have always strongly rejected their newpaper's political line, despite its daily and predictable right-wing ranting.
They are clearly under no illusions about their newspaper and treat it with the contempt and cynicism it so richly deserves. Purchasing a paper for its entertaining throwaway value does not automatically equate to being thick.
Contrast that with the substantial proportion of Guardian readers who amusingly consider their newspaper to be the font of all knowledge and truth, treating it with a religious-like reverence which is usually only reserved for a Holy Book......"the Guardian says ..... blah, blah, blah"
Daft ill-informed thickos
Posted 6 months ago # -
Don't think so He has to many influences and contacts through out the world to nail them
and they know it by the look on his sons face smirking at times when being interviewed.
Don't kid yourself, nothing will happen apart from them putting the people of the paper forward
has a bounty/reward and they'll be paid handsomely for there time inside .Posted 6 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
