Taxi Driver Online

You haven't got a fecking clue have you, Frank? On the strength of an allegation alone, you agreed to be interviewed by the Cab Inspector, or was that a Police Inspector? Is this a Civil interview carried out under civil procedures or perhaps a criminal investigation into a criminal allegation? What did you agree to Frank? How about a civil interview carried under civil procedures by a Lothian and Borders Police Inspector with the WEIGHT of a criminal investigation without first being informed of your RIGHTS, or don't have you any RIGHTS?

What are you RIGHTS, Frank?

Why don't we start with EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW?


God, you make me sick, you servile piece of shi*.

You're losing it again, gary.

making mountains out of molehills.

Aye, I'm losing it, but you are a good little slave with nothing to lose and nothing to fear because, Inspector Frank Smith will look after you, as long as you suck his knob.

How do you sleep at night?


You are one pathetic bas*ard, FRANK.

ANSWER THE QUESTIONS, FRANK

Did anyone see FRANK, disappear up his own [edited by admin]?

Does anyone want to comment before we get to the impartiality of their Kangaroo Court?

Surely, Wayne (UNCLE TOM) Casey can explain how the council protects everyone's rights.

You could have just spoken to John Blane about it in the first place, he is not a police officer but just support staff.
But no, mountains out of molehills.

It seems that you and jimmy boy just want to be above the law.

Just imagine, there you would be running around assaulting people, jimmy boy would no doubt be indulging in favourite subject of rape.

Even then, the two of you would still be moaning about how lifes not fair and nobody loves you.

You really need to get a grip of yourself.

And there you go, proving to all and sundry the clutz you are.

John Blain IS a police officer. He is a Special Constable.

And we don't want to be bove the Law. We just demand that the Law respects our rights.

And if you didn't have your head up your sphincter then you would be able to see reality.

City of Edinburgh Council is about as corrupt as you could get.

Butchers bakers and candlestick makers get a it of power and they have to prove their status by sgafting others.

Not acceptable old boy. Just not acceptable.

John Blain may once have been an active special constable but NOT at the Cab Office. His job there is that of Chief Examiner. (or perhaps just for you - head examiner.)

One day you'll check your facts before mouthing off.

Just proves the trade's fecked - letting assholes like you in. Have you ever had a medical or more importantly a phsychiatric evaluation?

Whatever did the people of Edinburgh do wrong in a past life to deserve the likes of you. Forum readers have a choice, but here we have to suffer your stupidity and lies 24/7. And you actually think you are relevant, important or what??

It doesnt matter what I type because your mind is already set.

So lets see and what the council will do in your case.

Bearing in mind you have already had two opportunities to get this thing sorted, you'll have opportunity number 3 on 16th March.

I wonder if the council will just suspend your license then, if you dont turn up?

You think the whole thing is a sham or kangeroo court, yet if it is, you are entitled to take it to a higher court away from the council.

Seems to me, and practically everyone else, that you are throwing your toys out of the pram.

Licensing is a species of administrative decision-making. Licensing decisions are on the whole taken by administrative bodies. Such bodies have no inherent jurisdiction – their powers are derived wholly from statute. They are charged with furthering the objectives of the legislation in the decisions that they make. They are able to formulate policies to guide them in their decision-making. They are not bound by the Civil or Criminal Procedure Rules. They work by considering the material which has been placed before them and making a decision which appears to them to be sensible and apt to advance the policy of the legislation in their local area. Their decision may involve some fact finding – Did the cabbie swear at the customer? Was the CCTV working? – but usually the outcome of the case turns on a value judgment. Parliament has not appointed professional judges to make such judgments, but has been content to leave them to experienced local individuals representative of their community.

Put that way, it would be illogical to suggest that only particular sorts of material – which in a different forum entirely would satisfy rules of evidence – can be taken into account by the decision-maker. And indeed, when one looks at the judgments of the higher courts on the issue, one finds no such stricture. In fact, one finds the opposite approach entirely.

http://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

As I said before, even with the characters involved skull, I would never wish anyone loses or has te ability to work stripped or postponed without a legitamite reason

What I don't understand though is this, a random customer gets into his cab and believes that skull has behaved in an unprofessional manner and reports him to the cab office

Sorry but there is no smoke without a fire and even though it's one mans word against anothers something mustve taken place. Whether it be via conversation, driving ability or practises or it could even be the route that was taken by skull.

So skull says he won't stand up to malicious and untrue accounts but without telling us what they are (if even he knows) then the petulant stance only makes you look guilty. Like the driver refusing to give a breathalyser test at the roadside forces the officer to take him in for a blood test and look more guilty

Have a look at my £40 CCTV system with sound.

Double post.