Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,657
I feel sorry for her feeling she had to publicly support him when obviously she had decided her marriage was over.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,482
'Coerced into selection?'
Now that is the most pertinent comment so far - except it was the Local Party who were coerced ......
An interesting tale worthy of House of Cards. Just saying.
'If no one went no faster than what I do there'd be a sight less trouble in this world'
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,482
Even 'innocent' parties can become complicit in running circles around a few local yokels who make up the 'membership'.
'If no one went no faster than what I do there'd be a sight less trouble in this world'
Button- Location: Dover
- Registered: 22 Jul 2016
- Posts: 2,900
So are my bins still getting emptied tomorrow then?
(Not my real name.)
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,482
Yup. Life continues . And there is still a mad bugger at DDC, who is on the best part of £100k a year, who has a working model of a a chair lift (fully operational) from Dover Castle to Stembrook Car Park......
'If no one went no faster than what I do there'd be a sight less trouble in this world'
ray hutstone- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
Jan Higgins wrote:I feel sorry for her feeling she had to publicly support him when obviously she had decided her marriage was over.
Why did she have to support him publicly? Because the local party thought it was a good thing?
Apparently she was integral to his defence strategy and must therefore have known the facts of the case long before the verdict was reached. Under whose advice was it that he opted for a jury trial to emphasis his strenuous but clearly unconvincing denials? Yet she maintained the daily charade of hand holding into court every morning. Now the love lorn wife does a Greta Garbo in tears.
She could have kicked him out a long time ago but chose not to. But let's not upset the party apple cart, eh?
Dover Pilot likes this
Weird Granny Slater- Location: Dover
- Registered: 7 Jun 2017
- Posts: 2,844
Captain Haddock wrote:Trial finishing this week?
Just watch NEXT week's Sunday papers whatever the verdict. Just saying.
Will the trees have died in vain?
'Pass the cow dung, my dropsy's killing me' - Heraclitus
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,657
ray hutstone wrote:Why did she have to support him publicly? Because the local party thought it was a good thing?
Apparently she was integral to his defence strategy and must therefore have known the facts of the case long before the verdict was reached. Under whose advice was it that he opted for a jury trial to emphasis his strenuous but clearly unconvincing denials? Yet she maintained the daily charade of hand holding into court every morning. Now the love lorn wife does a Greta Garbo in tears.
She could have kicked him out a long time ago but chose not to. But let's not upset the party apple cart, eh?
I do not know, she is the only person who does, I just think it can not have been easy for her.
Maybe for the party, maybe simply hoping he was innocent
, most likely for me is maybe keeping up appearances for her children's sake.
Paul Watkins likes this
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Moors- Registered: 3 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,227
Interesting to read that CE, until lockdown, was still going to the the Parliament on a daily basis to catch up with his mates. It really does sound like he thought he would blag his way out of this and was carrying on as if nothing had happened.
Captain Haddock likes this
ray hutstone- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
I see Natalie's PR team have been active in today's Sunday papers, much as our fishy Cap'n predicted. No explanation however of how she offered a nodding acquiesence to this guff from 2019. I think 'victim blaming' is the modern term. This is Aitkinism at it's best, for those with long memories.
“That sacred principle of our national life has been sacrificed in the current climate – as became clear with the false pursuit of baseless allegations against high profile individuals, some of whom were smeared beyond the grave.
“In my case, I have been subjected to daily falsehoods and vile abuse – from the malfeasance of cabinet ministers to the malice of twitter trolls.
“This has had the cumulative effect of jeopardising my right to a fair trial on charges I know to be baseless. That is why, having continued to work tirelessly for my constituents since these allegations were first made two years ago, I have now decided to stand down at this Election.”
Honesty is a weakness rather than an attribute in today's conservatism. Bravo the Elphickes - fitting in perfectly with the standards of Laughing Boy, Gove, Cummings et al.
Ross Miller likes this
Guest 3701- Registered: 19 Jul 2020
- Posts: 38
There was never any doubt in my mind.
I have not seen one word from the conservative association to reflect the poor choice in Charles. No statement to the victims. Just getting in behind the latest MP. Such poor form.
As for NE - Sure she’s had a rough time but I think she was well aware of his behaviour and has been for years. She was happy to say it was a witch hunt etc and jump to his defence etc. and had Charles been successful in smothering this case do any of you think she would have come forward and done the right thing
I believe the right thing to do is resign. Maybe seek a new mandate, but it is wrong to just carry on. As Charles said - repeatedly, it was an honour to serve the people - what a load of tosh. If NE wants to be a real and honourable MP she should step down and the local conservative association should have a long hard look at themselves and the selection process - and say sorry.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,573
Sardine
Whilst Charlie lied to all and thought his lawyers would save him
We are not in the elphicke household so who knows how much she knew
Why should she stand down
Even if she did she would probably win And increase majority Again
Jan Higgins likes this
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
no keith, labour would get in with a very large count
DFL likes this
Dover Pilot- Registered: 28 Jul 2018
- Posts: 333
Keith Sansum1 wrote:Sardine
Whilst Charlie lied to all and thought his lawyers would save him
We are not in the elphicke household so who knows how much she knew
Why should she stand down
Even if she did she would probably win And increase majority Again
I find it quite extraordinary how some members of this forum are just blindly able to defend the indefensible. Regardless of the Sunday press reports of corruption and a coup at the Dover conservative association. The fact of the matter is Natalie changed Charlies defence to try and manipulate an acquittal even though she knew he was guilty and has showed no remorse to the victims at all. She should stand down and let an open selection take place.
Guest 3701 likes this
Reginald Barrington- Location: Dover
- Registered: 17 Dec 2014
- Posts: 3,206
How exactly did she change his defence?
Arte et Marte
Dover Pilot- Registered: 28 Jul 2018
- Posts: 333
Neil Moors- Registered: 3 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,227
It looks like CCHQ has taken an interest here with a clear instruction to put distance between the two. You don't end up in the Mail on Sunday without a clear operation to do so - sanctioned by the top. No local tin pottery for now.
Guest 3701- Registered: 19 Jul 2020
- Posts: 38
RB - you would have to read the news to understand. Might be a bit of a struggle. In essence she told him to come clean on lying to police - before the prosecution proved he was lying. The defence then changed to a besotted fool who lost his head but didn’t do that which he was accused.
How are you getting on with the clouds ....
ray hutstone likes this
Guest 3701- Registered: 19 Jul 2020
- Posts: 38
I find it self serving that she went in on the caring angle - self harm, loyal wife blah blah blah and has now gone full circle and thrown him under the bus with a series of interviews laying the boot in.
Hey, he deserves it and he has made her life hell by fighting the charge and all the humiliation of the trial but she has responded in kind.
She now needs to be seen as the injured wife. Forget all her claims to the contrary beforehand and her vigour defence of him notwithstanding she knew a lot about the case and the evidence the crown was going to lead with. It’s shameful politics worthy of Charles.
I somehow doubt she would have done this had he been found not guilty.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,657
I have lost interest in the two Elphickes they are now old news unless you want to try stirring up trouble for his wife.
I am more interested to know who is this accused and arrested MP that still has not had the whip withdrawn, rape is far more serious than Charlies fumblings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------