Riaz Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Lazy boy, google bbc iplayer radio bristol, click on result, click on today's tab (Tuesday) 6.30 am show, press play, skip to 51 minutes and plug your earphones in. Post link here afterwards. I must be going mad, because I did that at lunchtime and it wasnt anything to do with us??! I'll try again tonight. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCAGFC Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 I must be going mad, because I did that at lunchtime and it wasnt anything to do with us??! I'll try again tonight. Thanks The programme that was listed on the BBC Radio website was for yesterdays show, you have to click on today to listen to todays programme. Around about 51 mins, the bloke is a stuttering buffoon. BCAGFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchay Red Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 He sounded like a barely literate plonker to me! Didn't seem too sure of what he was attempting to talk about, or of the sequence of events which have brought us to this point in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Bristol Red Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00jbr9n/Breakfast_With_Steve_Le_Fevre_09_08_2011/ 51 minutes and 40 seconds in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Said they were going to speak with Colin Sexstone - did they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Thanks guys. Peter Crispin you come accross as a right muppet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Peter Crispin you come accross as a right muppet. Don't agree with that. The muppets can string a sentence together................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Rollason Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Anyone taking this before a judge so long after the event will, quite rightly, get a right earful. No chance. Fail... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdgifford64 Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Indeed they already got their Village Green and if i had any say in the matter it would stay exactly as it is so they could carry on enjoying as they have for the past 20 odd years. PDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBerkeleyBoy Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Does any one know who is funfing the "anti" lot - this cant come cheap all this legal stuff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviestevieneville Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 He didn't have a clue did he ha ha . I expect the letter he handed into the council was written in crayon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark43 Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 So who was at the mediation talks on the TVG side?, it is obvious that this Peter Crispen bloke is not part of the TVG applicants campaign as he would have been there......unless they didn't want him there. I'm pretty sure he's been involved all the way, it sounds like the guy who's been on the tv and radio a few times before, the one that Colin Sexstone ripped to pieces when they were both on the local news together. Maybe its a different idiot though, they must have quite a few. Not sure why he wasnt at the mediation talks. but wouldnt surprise me if he went and forgot all about it, doesnt seem to know what day of the week it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
del ete Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Does any one know who is funfing the "anti" lot - this cant come cheap all this legal stuff? 4. How will the case be paid for? Public funding is available for judicial review actions to those people who satisfy the criteria. The funding is now called 'Community Legal Service Funding'. It used to be known as 'legal aid'. There is a two-part test to determine if you qualify: a test of the merits of your case, and a test of your means. If you receive Income Support, income-based Job Seeker's Allowance, or Guarantee State Pension Credit you will automatically satisfy the means test. O dear..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redland Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Right at the start he did say (if I heard correctly) that this random bloke he was interviewing was heading up a new group - can a "new group" or anyone off the street ask for a JR or does it have to be the original people who applied for the TVG ? It would have been handy to have that cleared up by the interview. Good point. Is it only the applicant for the TVG and the landowner who can ask for a judicial review or can any Tom Dick or Harry make an application? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchay Red Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Good point. Is it only the applicant for the TVG and the landowner who can ask for a judicial review or can any Tom Dick or Harry make an application? Well going by the info in post 23 by Awaydays it says that: "The Claimant (who must be a person who has been affected by the decision being challenged)" so I guess it has to be one of the TVG residents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redland Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Well going by the info in post 23 by Awaydays it says that: "The Claimant (who must be a person who has been affected by the decision being challenged)" so I guess it has to be one of the TVG residents. Doesn't sound like he was one of the TVG applicants (the claimant) if he wasn't a party to the mediation process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 This was too be expected, they had a deadline in which they had to reply and they have decided to leave it late. In most situations like this an appeal should be sent in quickly and is generally viewed very dimly if it it left late as in the majority of situations it's seen for what it is, which is simply a delaying tactic towards the stadium Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchay Red Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Doesn't sound like he was one of the TVG applicants (the claimant) if he wasn't a party to the mediation process. You may well be right. He didn't seem to be very well informed and to be honest I'm not sure he even knew what day it was! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRaw Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 After listening to this buffoon crispin, I am more confident then ever that a) a judge would not even consider this pathetic attempt and b) the final hurdle will be jumped for us to get on and build this stadium Incoherent babble, incorrect terminilogy and to some extent almost damn right lies.........and he was a former councillor. Le Fevre stumped him on numerous occasions....what chance would he have trying to convince a judge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 We still have no conformation that they have officially applied for a JR as such. As someone else says, the fact that radio Bristol haven't commented on this story since makes you wonder if it was just a threat of applying for one rather than actually done so. Surely the council would have confirmed it by now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calculus Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 We still have no conformation that they have officially applied for a JR as such. As someone else says, the fact that radio Bristol haven't commented on this story since makes you wonder if it was just a threat of applying for one rather than actually done so. Surely the council would have confirmed it by now? The council would be well advised to reply but they don't have to - the applicants have to go to court and commit financially before the expiry date if they're serious. The thing I find interesting about this is that if a serous application for a JR were on its way, this individual would know and wouldn't be trying to threaten the council in this half-4rsed way, Also interesting that the story hasn't been repeated, or picked up since first transmission. All of this leads me to believe that there is no JR application coming and this is the last desperate stand. Not long now ...... time for nerves to be held... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRaw Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 We still have no conformation that they have officially applied for a JR as such. As someone else says, the fact that radio Bristol haven't commented on this story since makes you wonder if it was just a threat of applying for one rather than actually done so. Surely the council would have confirmed it by now? Crispin suggested he hand delivered a letter to the council on Friday........thats the first stage of the process. The council only need to respond back to him saying they are happy with the legal process and their decision still stands. Only then can he apply for a JR but has to then convince a judge that there is "substantive" grounds for judicial review.....good luck with that considering his performance this morning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRaw Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Well going by the info in post 23 by Awaydays it says that: "The Claimant (who must be a person who has been affected by the decision being challenged)" so I guess it has to be one of the TVG residents. To me the only people that could be "affected" by the decision would be residents of Ashton Vale At this stage, it appears that it is not the Ashton Vale Group that have made this move but this newly formed SAVE group headed by Crispin A little research suggests that Crispin lives 2 miles away in Bishopsworth,so as the "claimant" how is he "affected" by the decision? or is it purely the fact he doesn't like the decision and thinks he can just create a group at the 11th hour to chance his arm......again, surely a Judge will see right through this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milo1111 Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 To me the only people that could be "affected" by the decision would be residents of Ashton Vale At this stage, it appears that it is not the Ashton Vale Group that have made this move but this newly formed SAVE group headed by Crispin A little research suggests that Crispin lives 2 miles away in Bishopsworth,so as the "claimant" how is he "affected" by the decision? or is it purely the fact he doesn't like the decision and thinks he can just create a group at the 11th hour to chance his arm......again, surely a Judge will see right through this i may be putting 2+2 together and getting 5 here, but the fact that this new SAVE group has been formed may show that some of the village idiots have lost interest, or at least that they have had a difference of opinion and have splintered into different factions. either way that must be good for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 4. How will the case be paid for? Public funding is available for judicial review actions to those people who satisfy the criteria. The funding is now called 'Community Legal Service Funding'. It used to be known as 'legal aid'. There is a two-part test to determine if you qualify: a test of the merits of your case, and a test of your means. If you receive Income Support, income-based Job Seeker's Allowance, or Guarantee State Pension Credit you will automatically satisfy the means test. O dear..... Na, nothing to worry about. The TVG application fails the merits of the case test as that is about whether the review tests the law in question a new way. This doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pie Eater Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Link now on this bristol http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Judicial-review-bid-stadium/story-13102821-detail/story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolman Block B Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Link now on this bristol http://www.thisisbri...tail/story.html How do all you intelligent people read into this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 So despite being a ex-councillor who'd know exactly how to apply for a JR, he's sent a letter to the council. Lets see if his new 'group' actually apply to a court and have the funding for a fight. Mind you we are now 8 weeks down the road... 4 to go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC&T Board Members Blagdon red Posted August 10, 2011 SC&T Board Members Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Key lines from the 'This is Bristol' report: "But the council says Mr Crispin would have to apply to the courts and not to them before a review could go ahead. Officially, therefore, a judicial review does not currently exist... Council spokesman Peter Holt said it had received no indication from the courts that a judicial review had been lodged. He said if there was, then the council would rigorously defend the decision which it believed was fair and had been reached by following the proper process." So at present we just have this guy depositing a letter with the council, which is not the correct procedure to follow if he wishes to apply for a JR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semblar Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 from the this is Bristol article: But we believe this additional evidence should be tested in court so it can be subjected to cross-examination in the same way that the applicants for the town green had their evidence tested at the public inquiry So the applicant's original "evidence" was tested under oath? pure spin and misdirection here! This also (to my understanding based on the great info posted above) shows a complete misunderstanding of what a JR does - it only looks at whether the decision was taken lawfully, NOT whether the actual decision is "fair". The article actually does a reasonable job of making this clear at the end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.