[Closed] Simon Danczuk

Of course it was a settup I'll just bet that the editor of the Sun made sure they were completely unaware of any impropriety on the part of any rogue journalist who helped set it up

[img] [/img]

then he's stupid for not realising it's was a honey trap. It should have taken him all of 30 secs to decide, "Hang on, this is a bit mardy" and put a stop to it.

He was stupid,to not consider the long game and that it would likely end in tears, leaving himself open to blackmail or the more likely kiss and tell.

I think many of the papers are being very unfair in the way they are portraying him as a noncey sex pest, saying he has a daughter not much younger(13) and he bombarded her with sexually explicit texts, really. I doubt he said anything more explicit than he feels horny, or spanking as we would have heard about it.
He should thank his lucky stars he never offered to take her up the oxo tower as the papers would have gone into melt down.

Someone else mentioned it was a shame her name will always be tarnished by Google search. But if she has taken money from the sun, that's her look out.

Someone else mentioned it was a shame her name will always be tarnished by Google search. But if she has taken money from the sun, that's her look out.

Well, someone might say that taking money from The Sun is the sort of poor judgement that Danczuk should not have been trying to exploit.

I think he was exploited by her and her by the sun.
And he was stupid to leave himself open to such sensationalism.

^^ this

He should have had some
[img] [/img]

Outofbreath- well aware of the CPS website. 9 years of being a detective taking IIOC cases to crown court says jurors don't decide. Judges review the evidential report, defence and prosecution barristers argue over images or groups of and whether the context influences the indecency (eg. Teacher taking pics of 9 year old girls getting changed-not nude or erotic posing which is lowest kevel so argued it was not indecent).

I have NEVER known a jury be shown images let alone decide on whether they are indecent. Legal professionals decide that and the jury decides on the possession element.

I think he was exploited by her and her by the sun.
And he was stupid to leave himself open to such sensationalism.

Se seems to have encouraged the comments and then gone to the press

As he said no fool like and old one

Did he ever actually see a photo of her though?

Cite your source.

Here's mine:

"Whether any photograph of a child is indecent is for the jury or magistrate or District Judge to decide"

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/h_to_k/indecent_photographs_of_children/#a24

9 years of being a detective taking IIOC cases to crown court says jurors don't decide. Judges review the evidential report, defence and prosecution barristers argue

Jury or magistrate or District Judge *are* the final arbiter. Obviously if the defence and prosecution agree there's no decision for them to make and no need to see the evidence.

His big crime is setting himself up as the champion of children/youths and their exploitation, then allowing himself to be led by his willy without applying any brain to the situation.

Plus his 'Oh, look at me' twitter persona set himself right up.

Tit

Also, he's made himself a whole lot of enemies within the local Labour party and within the Council chamber as a whole. He has very few friends left & has effectively hung himself out to dry. Locally he's seen as a 'red Tory' for taking the fail's money for his constant attacks on Corbyn. Fortunately, since the boundary changes he's not my MP even though I only live a mile from the Town Hall. He needs to go as he is seen as caring little for the town and all about his own aggrandizement.
The less said about his embarrassment of a wife the better..

I hope Labour kick this guy out asap:

"[i]The Labour MP Simon [b]Danczuk charged £5,000 for an interview with a national newspaper in which he discussed intimate text messages he had sent to a teenage girl.[/b]

The revelation will see Danczuk – who was suspended by his party over claims he acted inappropriately... open to further charges that he has been seeking to profit from his growing notoriety.

"[b]On Monday the MP for Rochdale admitted[/b] to the BBC’s Newsnight programme that [b]he had received £1,100 from a photo agency for pictures taken of him which were subsequently sold to newspapers.[/b] He refused to apologise for the arrangement. [b]“I don’t think it’s wrong at all actually,” [/b]he said.

The Observer understands that the Sun on Sunday paid Danczuk £5,000"
[/i]
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/09/simon-danczuk-5000-sun-on-sunday-interview

"When asked by The Observer about the alleged £5,000 payment from The Sun, Mr Danczuk reportedly replied: “I am not talking to the press.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/simon-danczuk-mp-sold-interview-about-sexting-scandal-to-tabloid-for-5000-a6804121.html

I hope Labour kick this guy out asap:

obvious troll is obvious.
Nowhere near your best work.

AFAIC he can charge what he likes for interviews about his private life.

I'm not even sure MPs are legally/morally obliged to talk to the press at all. If they were, they would be in interviews 24/7.

As for providing copyright images, why the hell shouldn't he charge for that?

So he should get involved in a sexual scandal that harms him and his party[ fueled by his alcohol issues] and then he should profit from this set of circumstances
I though her job was to serve the people and the area he was elected to represent.

Christ you tories really do admire anyone who makes money no matter the morality involved.

Maybe he was sick of everyone else putting in there two Penneth worth slagging him off every day (two ex wife's, young daughter, ex girlfriend and the young woman concerned and wanted to get his side of the story out there by way of an explanation of his actions.
Granted it would have been better if he had donated the proceeds to a (children's) charity.

No one is objecting to him having his say they are objecting to him getting paid for having his say [ when the cause of him needing to have his say was his impropriety]. Even you accept that it could have been dealt with better by him.

So he should get involved in a sexual scandal that harms him and his party[ fueled by his alcohol issue

Not really a sex scandal, single man while under the influence of alcohol replies to sexually explicit texts from a young woman saying he is horny.

As scandals go that is pretty piss poor. Not a rent boy, orange or nazi uniform in sight.

nazi uniform in sight.

[img] [/img]

BallsBantz innit.