Hummm ... it's embarrassing to have to read that about the 2 fellows who put your country on its knees.
I wouldn't know if this is possible with U.K Lawyers, which seem to be the one coordinating the matter. In France, it wouldn't. BTW, what we need to know also is which country will have jurisdiction; a French court would make sense considering that FIA matters shoud go in front of a French court. We should know more on Wednesday I guess: tomorrow Tuesday, August 29th is the limit stated by Massa and his lawyers for the FIA to answer their letter asking for the FIA position. If no answer on August 29th, or an "unsatisfactory one", they would go to courts. So probably the press will have a few things to say on Wednesday. Watch this space... Rgds
Mitterrand was indeed a mastermind in conspiration. Mitterrand and Rocard hated each other with a passion, which makes Rocard's remark slightly ironic. Mitterrand offered the job of Prime Minister to Rocard in application of the old principle: "better have him inside the tent and pissing outside, than outside the tent and pissing inside". As for their political, economical and financial heritage, well...that would be P & R I guess. (when Mitterrand took power in 1981, debt to GDP ratio was 21%; when he left fourteen years later, 66%; draw your conclusions) Rgds
We had the same here with the Blair-Brown era: their legacy was a country heavily indebted. Some people think money grows on trees.
Any self-respecting Frenchman would tell you exactly the same about U.S courts; French law is based on roman Law and Greek law, it has NOTHING to do with either English or U.S law, which, to us, are utter non-sense. The only question here is not if French c ourts are for masochists; it is that the FIA by-laws say that parties to that agreement accept that any litigation must go in a french court, that's all. Felipe Massa and his lawyers seem to think otherwise; let's see. Law is the only matter that is interesting me here...as for Massa being the 2008 world champion, well... Rgds
Your wrong, friend. It still exists. Actually, THEY still exist; a number of these are still waiting, in a State's cellar. Should the need come again, they are ready (this is not a joke). Rgds "Depuis l’abolition de la peine capitale en 1981, les guillotines sont conservées en plusieurs lieux : les bois de justice parisiens ont été déposés à Marseille, au Musée national des arts et traditions populaires (désormais « Musée des civilisations de l’Europe et de la Méditerranée » - MUCEM) ; deux guillotines issues de départements d’Outre-Mer sont conservées au « Musée national des prisons » dans les sous-sols de l’ancienne prison de Fontainebleau. En Belgique, une guillotine est visible au musée de la Vie wallonne de Liège, une autre au musée Gruuthuse de Bruges, une troisième, incomplète, à la citadelle de Dinant. En Algérie, la guillotine de la prison de Serkadji, vestige de l'époque coloniale française, est exposée au Musée central de l'Armée à Alger"
Guillotines may still exist, but in France the death penalty by decapitation has been abolished. That could be what @jpalmito meant.
What us Brits find utter nonsense is the leniency and the complete inadequacy of the French legal system. After years of failure, the French still believes in JJ Rousseau' theories, and the rehabilitation of criminals, a total joke. Even charged with an offence, most criminals are on bail instead of being incarcerated; no wonder they keep offending ! Condemned criminals benefit of "amenaged sentences", concurrent sentences (instead of consecutives), reduction of sentence (remise de peines), and finally conditional release, which means that some spend less of 40% of the initial sentence !!! In some famous cases I won't mention, the condemnations were never applied in fact, which makes a total mockery of justice. I much prefer the US legal system that protects the public, gives heavy condemnations, consecutive sentences, and puts criminals in a place where they will never be a threat to society. "Dura lex, sed lex !"
Your critics are legit - but an amazing fact is that crime rates are lower in France than in the US, by all metrics. Anyway, this Massa vs FIA case will be interesting if it moves forward - which I'm still not sure.
Not sure either; hopefully we should know at the end of this day, or perhaps tomorrow, if Massa and his lawyers have received an answer from the FIA to their letter of enquiry, and if they intend to go to the courts indeed. Rgds
Well, that would be another discussion I guess, probably to be had in P & R. What I was trying to say is that, unless your are a qualified lawyer in compared Laws (I have a friend who is qualified lawyer in New-York and in Paris) understanding the subtilities of another Law system than the one of your country is very difficult indeed. Add to that that in the U.S, some Laws might even vary from State to State , which is very difficult to understand for us citizens from a centralised State... Being in court is already rather puzzling and unconfortable, I shudder to think what it would be with a different system of Law. (I have a fond memory of a court case that I attended, when "kids form the suburbs" (shall we say...) were in front of a judge for a petty larceny. One said suddenly loudly "Your Honor, I object", to which an absolutely outraged Judge answered: "this is a french court, not in an American movie; in French law, one does not object the Judge".) Rgds
"that protects" is slowly but surely transformed into the past tense. As for France - metaphorically speaking Tweet— Twitter API (@user) date The upside of the FR/EU lack of law enforcement, is that you, the very humble citizen can take matters into your own hands. Not that I recommend it.
Because it's not reported, pure and simple. Solves all problems Police municipale - we are not empowered to deal with ... Gendarmerie - what do you want us to do with ...
