As someone with a strict moral code, my feeling is the amoral, crinkly shuffler ought to have gone down for a lengthy stretch. So much the better if he shed his mortal coil whilst banged-up.

There's nothing more corrosive to business/society that corruption.

 

Money talks .... again.

 

If they were unfounded alegations why pay? So it's not a bribe it's a blackmail payoff.

So as Ecclestone was silencing unfounded allegations, Lets see a full investigations into his tax affairs and show himself pure and honest.

 

Impossible when there is so much money involved - by the law of averages, some of it will be dirty.

 

Why pay? From the defence teams position - risk mitigation.

I have worked with top barristers a couple of times in cases heard in the High Court, and- apologies for going into legal-speak here - they all talked about the 'buggeration factor'. No matter how sound your case, there is always a risk of something going wrong and the Judge ruling against you.

I am not for a second suggesting that Bernie's case was watertight - I have no idea, but I suspect not - but from the his and the defenses point of view, this settlement avoids the buggeration factor.

 

Why pay? From the defence teams position - risk mitigation.

I have worked with top barristers a couple of times in cases heard in the High Court, and- apologies for going into legal-speak here - they all talked about the 'buggeration factor'. No matter how sound your case, there is always a risk of something going wrong and the Judge ruling against you.

I am not for a second suggesting that Bernie's case was watertight - I have no idea, but I suspect not - but from the his and the defenses point of view, this settlement avoids the buggeration factor.
[/quote]

He wouldn't have stood a chance, with the guy who took the bung already doing time for it. If Bernie had been found not guilty they whould have had to let the other guy out and probably face paying him off. I think Bernies case whould have been as tight and sound as a sieve. And being found guilty stood to loose his freedom and his fortune as every other bribe and bung emerged. As Fester said with the money he has some has got to be dirty, he just had a way of cutting his losses.

If this was Monopoly it would be "Pay $100M do not go directly to gaol"

 

WHS. Whether innocent or guilty, you would pay to avoid the risk of the case going against you. Paying up proves nothing, other than the justice system being stupid.

 

Don't point out the blindingly obvious Ian

 

An uncanny resemblance to Joe Pesci; this could be a still from Goodfellas...



"All right, I'll tell you something: go f_uck your mother."

 

I meant that the paying of the bloke to silence the questions about his tax affairs should be a seperate issue to what he has settled out of court for. It's not up to us in the UK to pick fault with another countrys legal system - we have Brussels to unfairly manage that for us.

My view was and still is that if you are happy to pay someone 27 million quid to make them stop asking questions, you must be fairly sure there are answers you don't want to have to give.

That said, vile little man and all the money in the world won't change that.