MILLIONAIRE Tory Cabinet minister refers to police as " plebs " - Police fabricate evidence

Calling police pleb is accurate. All non upper class/elite are plebs that is the definition of it. The real question here is not about what was said but about where the power lies. Is it with the pleb police officer following orders at the gate or a politician thinking he is representing the government.
 
Von Smallhausen said:
Section 5 is harassment, alarm and distress and covers insulting words or behaviour - it would all come down to the copper's perception or how he felt. It has been held that police officers can be victims of Section 5 - DPP v Orum.

Section 5 states ....
Click to expand...

I know, but would you say the minister broke the law by calling a police officer a pleb, and if so, what exact words under Section 4/5 would he be in breach of?

I understand if you don't want to answer it though given what you do.
 
Longbow said:
I know, but would you say the minister broke the law by calling a police officer a pleb, and if so, what exact words under Section 4/5 would he be in breach of?

I understand if you don't want to answer it though given what you do.
Click to expand...

If the copper felt alarmed then yes he did. Personally, I wouldn't be alarmed by pleb but the ****** and blinding at the gates which is well within earshot of the public would tip it for me. I do think that Andrew Mitchell broke the law - at least on paper - but it is a law the allows for discretion.

It's a Section 5 for me, certainly not a 4.
 
Von Smallhausen said:
If the copper felt alarmed then yes he did. Personally, I wouldn't be alarmed by pleb but the ****** and blinding at the gates which is well within earshot of the public would tip it for me. I do think that Andrew Mitchell broke the law - at least on paper - but it is a law the allows for discretion.

It's a Section 5 for me, certainly not a 4.
Click to expand...

I'd think that particular officer might need to not work weapon's detail and Downing Street guard duty again if swear words 'alarmed' him.
I don't think swearing at police is at all acceptable, would never contemplate doing such a thing. Frankly I think swearing and abuse of anyone in any situation is uncalled for and unnecessary, but it does occur.

What this case does very nicely demonstrated is the difference in UK law of 'the balance of probabilities' for civil cases, and 'beyond reasonable doubt' for criminal cases.
The whip didn't have to take the civil case, he took it, he lost, now he is encumbered with costs.
 
Hikari Kisugi said:
I'd think that particular officer might need to not work weapon's detail and Downing Street guard duty again if swear words 'alarmed' him.
I don't think swearing at police is at all acceptable, would never contemplate doing such a thing. Frankly I think swearing and abuse of anyone in any situation is uncalled for and unnecessary, but it does occur.

What this case does very nicely demonstrated is the difference in UK law of 'the balance of probabilities' for civil cases, and 'beyond reasonable doubt' for criminal cases.
The whip didn't have to take the civil case, he took it, he lost, now he is encumbered with costs.
Click to expand...

I agree but Mr Mitchell could always have used the side gate as most others do.
 
Why does the title say "MILLIONAIRE" when that's of no relevance to the thread topic what so ever? if it had said black then it would have been removed (whether it was relevant or not).
 
ubersonic said:
Why does the title say "MILLIONAIRE" when that's of no relevance to the thread topic what so ever? if it had said black then it would have been removed (whether it was relevant or not).
Click to expand...

Er, it has direct relevance because he called them plebs - therefore his social class and economic status directly come into the equation - it is directly relevant because the insinuation, in context to the current clime, is that the privileged are completely out of touch with how the "common" person lives and that they exhibit a healthy disdain for them.
 
If the DM report on this, the price of his house will be mentioned several times during the article.....speaking of which......Andrew Mitchell's house is on the Black Friday sale :D:o
 
Xordium said:
Er, it has direct relevance because he called them plebs - therefore his social class and economic status directly come into the equation - it is directly relevant because the insinuation, in context to the current clime, is that the privileged are completely out of touch with how the "common" person lives and that they exhibit a healthy disdain for them.
Click to expand...

Wha?

Pleb is another word for Idiot/fool/moron/stupid/etc. There's no social context to it :S

*EDIT*

Having Googled it, it seems the was social context to it in Roman times, but like I said the meaning today is just an insult against a persons intelligence.
 
ubersonic said:
Wha?

Pleb is another word for Idiot/fool/moron/stupid/etc. There's no social context to it :S

*EDIT*

Having Googled it, it seems the was social context to it in Roman times, but like I said the meaning today is just an insult against a persons intelligence.
Click to expand...

There was a social context and there still is a social context to it. As an educated man he would have known what he was saying. Therefore, the usage of Millionaire in the title is directly relevant.
 
ubersonic said:
Wha?

Pleb is another word for Idiot/fool/moron/stupid/etc. There's no social context to it :S

*EDIT*

Having Googled it, it seems the was social context to it in Roman times, but like I said the meaning today is just an insult against a persons intelligence.
Click to expand...

My understanding of English is different to yours.
A pleb is someone who serves or works for an established elite class.
His use of the term was accurate.
If he had meant it as 'slow witted' then the judge's comments might also have backed him up in this usage, I doubt he did, his arrogance is what has ruined him.
He could have apologised the day after the incident and that been an end to it.
 
Xordium said:
There was a social context and there still is a social context to it. As an educated man he would have known what he was saying.
Click to expand...

I'm an educated man and until now I didn't know it used to have a social context, I have only ever heard it used as a substitute for idiot/moron/etc. As most people use/understand it.
 
ubersonic said:
As most people use/understand it.
Click to expand...

I would say because you're the only one arguing that on this page and several other people aren't that maybe you are not as correct on this as you believe. Especially when it appears you were unaware of the origins of the word. And you may well be educated but I doubt you are as educated as Mr Mitchell - I am certain he would have know the Roman origins - especially as he read History at Jesus College Cambridge ...
 
Last edited:
stop using Wikipedia

Pleb : An ordinary person, especially one from the lower social classes. Cambridge

Pleb : 2.(British, informal, often derogatory) a common vulgar person Collins

I am actually surprised that so many do not know that the Plebs are the lower orders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom