PeterMac's FREE e-book - Chapter 61. Brückner’s “Arrest Warrant “ cancelled.
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Madeleine Beth McCann :: PeterMac's FREE e-book: What really happened to Madeleine McCann?
Page 1 of 1 • Share
PeterMac's FREE e-book - Chapter 61. Brückner’s “Arrest Warrant “ cancelled.
by Jill Havern 29.07.24 10:54
Chapter 61. Brückner’s “Arrest Warrant “ cancelled.
WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE THE NUGGETS ?
Potentially in a very seriously compromised situation. Even assuming that as church-going and legally upright and decent professional people who either were lied to, or at best not told the whole truth when asked to do what appeared to be a simple if strange and obscure task by some acquaintances, they must by now realise that they have been ’set up’, and that their involvement is capable of being seen in the eyes of the law as conspiracy, or “accessory after the fact.”
If, with that knowledge, they remain silent, they could also fall into the definition of Assisting Offender S. 4(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 refers, as Mr Nugget, a lawyer, will be well aware.
Full chapter here:
https://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/2024/07/chapter-61.html
____________________
PeterMac's FREE e-book
Gonçalo Amaral: The truth of the lie
CMOMM & MMRG Blog
MAGA 
MBGA
Jill Havern- Chief Faffer, Forum Owner
- Posts : 31272
Activity : 44098
Likes received : 7760
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe -
Cammerigal, Silentscope and Bluebagthepirate like this post
Re: PeterMac's FREE e-book - Chapter 61. Brückner’s “Arrest Warrant “ cancelled.
by PeterMac 30.07.24 23:02
In chapter 61 I wrote
“WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE THE NUGGETS ?
Potentially in a very seriously compromised situation. Even assuming that as church-going and legally upright and decent professional people who either were lied to, or at best not told the whole truth when asked to do what appeared to be a simple if strange and obscure task by some acquaintances, they must by now realise that they have been ’set up’, and that their involvement is capable of being seen in the eyes of the law as conspiracy, or “accessory after the fact.”
If, with that knowledge, they remain silent, they could also fall into the definition of Assisting Offender S. 4(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 refers, as Mr Nugget, a lawyer, will be well aware”
I have reflected on that for another day or so.
Bernt Stellander reports that Mr Nugget is a Lawyer – which gives us the choice of Solicitor - whose disciplinary authority is the Law Society, or Barrister – whose authority is the Bar Council
As divisions of the second great profession they have almost identical Codes of Conduct, which apply to all members, and they apply whether the members are practising as lawyers, or are using their Professional status to persuade people of their probity and overall trustworthiness to be, for example on the Board of a company, on the County Council, or an MP, or any such similar occupation.
The Law Society Code reads
Under Section 1: Maintaining trust and acting fairly
1.4 You do not mislead or attempt to mislead […] others, either by your own acts or omissions or allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others […]
The Bar Council Code reads
Under Rule C8
rC8 You must not do anything which could reasonably be seen by the public to undermine your honesty, integrity (CD3) and independence (CD4).
The Codes obviously mention and are aimed at dealings with Clients but are still wide enough to include ‘restrictions’ and clear statements about how the profession wishes its members to behave.
Bernt Stellander reports that Mrs Nugget is a regular Church goer, which implies a devout follower of and believer in the Christian Faith of whichever sect or nomination.
I am told on good authority that the New Testament is full of instructions and exhortations about how Christians should conduct themselves and live their lives even in the most extreme of circumstances and even when feeling themselves to be in personal danger.
I will not presume to repeat those words here. Those who know, know.
IF THEN what Bernt Stellander observed and reported, and his interpretation of those events is correct, which given the temporal nexus with other things he reports seems more likely than pure coincidence and Occams Razor would allow, the Nuggets may be in an invidious position, BUT THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN, except to have offered friendship and Charitable assistance in good faith to those who asked for and said they needed it.
REFS:
https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/code-conduct-solicitors/
https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/the-bsb-handbook.
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/
“WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE THE NUGGETS ?
Potentially in a very seriously compromised situation. Even assuming that as church-going and legally upright and decent professional people who either were lied to, or at best not told the whole truth when asked to do what appeared to be a simple if strange and obscure task by some acquaintances, they must by now realise that they have been ’set up’, and that their involvement is capable of being seen in the eyes of the law as conspiracy, or “accessory after the fact.”
If, with that knowledge, they remain silent, they could also fall into the definition of Assisting Offender S. 4(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 refers, as Mr Nugget, a lawyer, will be well aware”
I have reflected on that for another day or so.
Bernt Stellander reports that Mr Nugget is a Lawyer – which gives us the choice of Solicitor - whose disciplinary authority is the Law Society, or Barrister – whose authority is the Bar Council
As divisions of the second great profession they have almost identical Codes of Conduct, which apply to all members, and they apply whether the members are practising as lawyers, or are using their Professional status to persuade people of their probity and overall trustworthiness to be, for example on the Board of a company, on the County Council, or an MP, or any such similar occupation.
The Law Society Code reads
Under Section 1: Maintaining trust and acting fairly
1.4 You do not mislead or attempt to mislead […] others, either by your own acts or omissions or allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others […]
The Bar Council Code reads
Under Rule C8
rC8 You must not do anything which could reasonably be seen by the public to undermine your honesty, integrity (CD3) and independence (CD4).
The Codes obviously mention and are aimed at dealings with Clients but are still wide enough to include ‘restrictions’ and clear statements about how the profession wishes its members to behave.
Bernt Stellander reports that Mrs Nugget is a regular Church goer, which implies a devout follower of and believer in the Christian Faith of whichever sect or nomination.
I am told on good authority that the New Testament is full of instructions and exhortations about how Christians should conduct themselves and live their lives even in the most extreme of circumstances and even when feeling themselves to be in personal danger.
I will not presume to repeat those words here. Those who know, know.
IF THEN what Bernt Stellander observed and reported, and his interpretation of those events is correct, which given the temporal nexus with other things he reports seems more likely than pure coincidence and Occams Razor would allow, the Nuggets may be in an invidious position, BUT THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN, except to have offered friendship and Charitable assistance in good faith to those who asked for and said they needed it.
REFS:
https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/code-conduct-solicitors/
https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/the-bsb-handbook.
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/
PeterMac- Investigator
- Posts : 13966
Activity : 16969
Likes received : 2075
Join date : 2010-12-06 -
Cammerigal and Silentscope like this post
Similar topics» New from PeterMac's FREE e-book: CHAPTER 58 The Trials and Tribulations of Christian Brückner
» PeterMac's FREE e-book: CHAPTER 63 Addendum A response to critiques of Chapter 63 – SmithGerryMan
» PeterMac's FREE e-book: Chapter 51 Some random unrelated thoughts
» Latest from PeterMac's FREE e-book: CHAPTER 63 SMITH-GERRY-MAN SCRUTINISED
» PeterMac's FREE e-book. Chapter 62: Pool Photo Proves Madeleine Was Dead
» PeterMac's FREE e-book: CHAPTER 63 Addendum A response to critiques of Chapter 63 – SmithGerryMan
» PeterMac's FREE e-book: Chapter 51 Some random unrelated thoughts
» Latest from PeterMac's FREE e-book: CHAPTER 63 SMITH-GERRY-MAN SCRUTINISED
» PeterMac's FREE e-book. Chapter 62: Pool Photo Proves Madeleine Was Dead
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Madeleine Beth McCann :: PeterMac's FREE e-book: What really happened to Madeleine McCann?
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
