MOSLEY Interview July 30, 2008 "I Got Set-Up"

So he claims to be entrapped??

If it weren't for this inducement, he wouldn't have had an orgy with 5 dominatrixes?!?

Horsesh#$%

A better man wouldv'e immediately resigned for the betterment of the organization but not that power-hungry nazi fascist scumbag.

 

Huh!?.... I must be misunderstanding the above statement. IMNSHO, we know WAY more about the "actual activities" than "necessary". We've got video, pictures, signed affidavits (although the girl that set up the video was apparently put under pressure to sign by the paper.] Then we have the court case itself. How much is "hearsay"?

As to the name, I suspect it could be almost anyone - Mad Max has pi$$ed enough people off over the years...... However, I think the more interesting Q becomes: "What did this mysterious name say?" - Presumably, it's someone who "knew" something about MM's "sexual tastes": "Hey, Bernie, you know MM is into sadisitic sex orgies? I reckon he could be set up such that he'd have to resign."

So, who has MM shared his sexual deviancy with?.....

Cheers,
Ian

 

Beautifully stated Ted. Anti Semite, mf!!!!!

 

+1 to the first part.

However, IIRC the court ruled that there were no "nazi overtones" but rather it was a fairly standard "prisoners / guards / prison warden S&M scene." [All over the 'Net BTW.]

After all, we don't want MM suing anyone in here, do we?....

Cheers,
Ian

 

Except the script was conducted in German...by the son of the British Fascist Party and a Hitler sympathizer. But I am sure that had nothing to do with any Nazi undertones...

 

Quote from Ron: "So Bernie gave him a name........now who could that be???"

Answer: Ron Dennis, he (Gregory) and Lewis (Jean Girard, Talladega Nights) were all upset because Max uses the same whip maker that they use..... Gotta keep those drivers in line you know!

 

Don't forget to add that the "prison" uniforms were almost identical to those used in the concentration camps. They certainly don't use those today.

 

I can understand the scepticism but the court were well aware of the things you mention, they heard days of evidence, presumably watched the entire video (perhaps several times), and would be very familiar with Mosely's background. They concluded there was no evidence of a Nazi theme and, since we know a lot less about the whole affair than the court does, to say they got it wrong is hardly justified.

 

Quo Buono? It could be a revenge thing but it makes sense that whomever was behind it had something to gain financially with him out of the way. He probably knows exactly who it was.

 

Funny you should mention this. I sat on a jury a couple of years ago about a poor guy that got pulled into a Ponzi scheme for financing a film. The defendant was guilty, all of us on the jury said so to each other, but because there wasn't enough evidence, i.e. smoking gun kind of stuff, we couldn’t find in the plaintiff’s favor. That's the thing about the law, you've go to follow it even if you don't like the results. Let me tell you it sure sucked when we had to give our verdict.

If old Max or someone else had given one, just one, Heil Hitler salute or had been wearing a swastika you wouldn't be making that post. Would you? That's what I mean. Everything else is there but a good lawyer could cast enough doubt to force you to say that it's not for certain that's what was going on. Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck...

 

Yes, and there was a court that ruled OJ not guilty, too.

There was plenty of circumstantial evidence to support that that fascist pig Mosley was acting out some sick Nazi fantasy. That there wasn't sufficient evidence for a court ruling does not mean that that is not what happened. Nazi-like uniforms, a script in German, and a fascist pig involved are hardly an argument that his sick acts were not Nazi themes. Are you suggesting that that scumbag enjoys German-speaking prison scenes but wasn't doing a Nazi fantasy?!?

I hardly think so.

Mosley is scum and that he is still in office is an absolute embarrassment to the sport. He should be fired immediately and sent into obscurity in disgrace with his Ecclestone millions in bribes.

 

Ahhhh, the ol' Marion Barry defense - "***** set me up"

Doesn't bode well for us... It worked for Barry -- caught on video smokin crack and that dude is still in government around here. And DC is only marginally more screwed up than the FIA...

 

The court had all the evidence, including the circumstantial evidence which can and will have been taken into account by the English court and it is they who are "suggesting that the scumbag enjoys German-speaking prison scenes but wasn't doing a Nazi fantasy?!?" I'm not saying he wasn't, but I certainly wouldn't argue with the findings of the court and insist that he was given they have considerably better knowledge of all the circumstances than I do.

 

I believe the £60k award which is buttons to pay for a newspaper, reflect's he was guilty, but the jury were persuaded to let him off the hook, he has called in a favour from his friends in high places, and now he owes them big time IMHO.

 

So what? - Maybe speaking German turns him on. He has denounced any nazi connections, and as far as I know has never been shown to be a nazi/Hitler sympathizer. The point is that the court found no nazi "connotations". Note that I'm absolutely NOT trying to defend the M/fk'er, but rather trying to get the facts (as determined by a court of law) correct.

BS! - Almost any "fancy dress" or "costume" store has "prison" uniforms hanging on the racks. If you start looking on the 'net you'll find plenty more - As I said above, the "prison thing" is a pretty standard "fetish".

Again, I think the guy's a complete prick for not fading away over the past few months, but let's try and stick with the "facts".

As always, my 02c,
Cheers,
Ian

 

On the face of it you might think the jury was somehow persuaded to find for Mosely but the judge thought they'd got it wrong and so awarded him a minimal level of damages. However, there wasn't a jury, the trial was held before a lone judge, so that wasn't the case.

It's interesting that the judge commented on the Nazi angle at all because the case wasn't actually about whether the newspaper had falsely accused him of that (although a subsequent libel or defamation case will be) but about whether or not his privacy had been invaded, in contravention of European law.

 

He would, wouldn't he...

I believe in English courts, the finding is "Not Proven". The main defense witness didn't show up, preventing the newspaper from fully defending themselves, if my understanding is correct.

 

Thanks for the clarification. [EDIT - I was referring to post #18.]

"will* be, or *might* be?.......

Seriously, is he *still* not going away?

M/k'ers got some cojones, that's for sure!

Cheers,
Ian

 

Thank's Ian, I think the damage has been though, I really dont think he should still be in this job, it's a disgrace whatever way you look at it.

 

"a conspiracy from someone involved in either Formula One or road cars to weaken his position and force him to resign."
Who could zis be?

 

I understand the comments from those who are supporting the judge, however I would submit the following...

There is a difference between something most of us know to be objectionable and foul and being able to prove same. Let's say you are a cop and are sitting in a donut shop and hear an engine revving and tires screeching. You look outside and see a kid in a Corvette doing a burnout and sliding all over the road - he hit 100mph and crests the hill, but you can't quite make out his license plate. You hear his engine racing and getting closer, and this time you're waiting... he comes over the hill but he's slowing down to pull into the donut shop. You KNOW it was him and you KNOW what he did, but is there a reasonable doubt in court? Sure there is... maybe it was a different car. Maybe he wasn't going as fast as you thought. Etc etc etc until the cows come home, but you and the kid both know what happened.

Same with Mosley. German uniforms... concentration camp theme. The "I spoke German because one girl was German" is laughable considering he was saying things with a German accent like "She needs more of ze punishment!". But can you *prove* it was Nazi themed? Is there reasonable enough doubt to think maybe it wasn't Nazi themed? It doesn't take much of a lawyer to plant enough doubt that it wasn't *necessarily* Nazi themed to let Mosley win.

Mosley is playing this like it's a court affirmation that he didn't engage in a Nazi hooker orgy... and some lesser brained in the media (like the laughable excuse for an F1 news site - Pitpass) are actually buying into it. The court decision doesn't mean Mosley isn't the son of a Nazi and didn't participate in anti-semitic behaviour before in his life, and isn't a sorry excuse for a human. It also doesn't mean he didn't participate in a Nazi themed hooker orgy... it just means that this particular judge didn't find enough evidence *proving* it was a Nazi themed hooker orgy to let the newspaper claim it as a fact.

In other words, the court judgement wasn't "No, it wasn't a nazi orgy" but rather "you can't say it was - there isn't enough evidence to support that it was, so the individual is free to draw their own conclusions, but you can't state as a fact that it was Nazi themed when it's not a proveable fact".

It's like being found not guilty in a US court. Not guilty is NOT the same thing as "innocent". There is a very important distinction. Just like the cop who doesn't get the tickets to stick to the kid in the Corvette. The kid may want to claim it proves he didn't do it - nonsense - all it proves is there wasn't enough proof to prove he did it as an indisputable fact.. it doesn't mean he didn't do it at all.

 

I don't remember hearing anything about a witness not turning up, I guess that's possible. Remember that in this case MM was the plaintiff and he had to demonstrate that the newspaper had invaded his privacy in breach of European law. He did that to the satisfaction of the judge who in effect found the case "proven", although that would not be the term used, there isn't a "not proven" verdict in English law, but we do have it in Scotland.

 

My understanding is that the whole Nazi thing is irrelevant to the real focus of the case he just won - invasion of privacy according to EU laws. The judge expressed an opinion about the amount of Nazi evidence available, but I don't think that it matters for the legal position and outcome.

However... for the upcoming Libel cases, the Nazi roleplay as fact or just made up by the tabloids will be a core issue. As will any evidence supporting a frame-up conspiracy.