Recent Posts

😂

Make sure you post a pic of you manage to find such a hoody..

Glad to be back out 6 weeks after my surgery. Happy enough with 95 given an 8 and 9 on the card. Lost 2 balls in the leaves, 1 on the fairway. So frustrating 😂 Chris (not Sleazy) shot a great round of 83, his best of the year.

Click to see full-size image.

cool story bro

Couldn’t have said it better myself

Should get a hoody with it on

There are some good deals on with flights at the moment - I've booked today to go in June 26 to play the WSOP super seniors and Virgin were almost giving the flights away. 

Unforunately you're barred fom the Super Seniors.

You're obviously way too young.

Such a smoothie.

There are some good deals on with flights at the moment - I've booked today to go in June 26 to play the WSOP super seniors and Virgin were almost giving the flights away. 

Unforunately you're barred fom the Super Seniors.

You're obviously way too young.

Stephen Dale Petit w/EC on geetar.

@Tikay LISTEN!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUvbRhWQtEo

cool story bro

Interesting post Phil, thanks.

I would have thought it'd be jolly hard to (further) damage Mr Trump's "reputation". In effect, he has no reputation to damage, does he?

Incidentally, I gather that the piece was never broadcast or on Social Media in the USA, only the UK.

Long retired now. But I still find Law interesting. Thought I would give some brief thoughts on the BBC and Panorama/Trump.

1. People seem to have polarised opinions about both the BBC and the Donald. Neither of which are all good or all bad-despite what people would have you believe

2. The BBC desperately tries to be independent. Unlike almost all of its rivals, who just want to push their own narrow agendas to the exclusion of everything else. When was the last time GB News or the Mail. or the Mirror, gave a balanced, reasoned opinion?

3. Doesn't mean that the BBC always succeeds, or that there are not people within it with their own biases. That Panorama mash-up was terrible. Unlike various other things that its critics try to lump in with it

4. The timing of the Trump threats are very deliberate. This happened 13 months ago. The time limit for an English Defamation action is 1 year. An English Company, funded by the British Taxpayer, broadcast a potentially Defamatory programme in the UK (not America) 13 months ago. The timing is deliberate-designed to prevent any action being heard where it should have been-here. What is known in the trade as "forum shopping"

5. I don't claim to be a Floridan Law expert. But the Donald faces 2 massive hurdles:-

(1) He needs to show reputational damage (in England, that is "lowered in the estimation of right-thinking people"). For most of us, that would be easy. But this is the most marmite character in history. His fans follow him regardless. Likewise his detractors. This is a man who won the votes of the US electorate, twice, regardless of massive bad publicity-far, far bigger than anything the BBC may have done. His reputation seems remarkably resilient

(2) In Floridan Law Defamation needs to include "malice". Trying to prove that someone defames deliberately, rather than stupidly, is a minefield

6. Why is this action not in the UK? Simple. Damages would be in the tens of thousands, not hundreds of millions. And Defamation actions in England stop if the Claimant dies. This sort of action in England would likely outlast a man who is 80 next June

Been awake since yesterday waiting for updates..

Such a tease.

No luck! Actually had a really bad day with all ins 😂

Kings v jacks, guy turns a Jack

aces v KQss and rivers trip queens.

Poker eh?