placeholder
header

home | Archive | analysis | videos | data | weblog

placeholder
news in other languages:
placeholder
Editorials in English
fr
Editorials in Spanish
esp
Editorials in Italian
ita
Editorials in German
de

placeholder

UK's top law firm to defend Mayor of London against blogger

By Aleksander Boyd

London 15.06.06 | Today I have received notice from law firm Berrymans Lace Mawer (BLM) on behalf of Ken Livingstone. It goes like this: "Dear Mr Boyd, (Yourself v Ken Livingstone) We confirm that we have been instructed on behalf of the defendant in relation to this matter and attach a copy of the acknowledgment of service for your information. We understand that, on this basis, the defence will be due to be served on 6 July 2006."

So Red Ken, leftist radical notoriously known for his anti-establishment political position, goes and gets himself the services of a law firm ranked in the 56th position of the UK top 100 legal firms to defend himself against an expatriate blogger. Reportedly BLM's turnover for 2005 was 40.2 million and has 802 staff.

First question then; how can Livingstone afford an outfit whose partners produce, each, annual revenue of 423,000? I don't think his income as Mayor permits for such extravagant and capitalistic expenses.

Second question then: would it be correct to assume that the Greater London Authority (GLA) will foot the bill?

Third question then: taking into consideration that my claim is specifically against Ken Livingstone, and not with the GLA as he has falsely and repeatedly tried to imply, and supposing that indeed the GLA will pay for Livingstone's defence, is it lawful that the Mayor of London uses Londoners' taxpayer money to resolve legal issues of a personal nature?

Fourth question then: who, where, when and how it was approved such use of public funds?

Fifth question then: if Livingstone is so certain about his allegations against me is it really necessary to contract the services of such a top notch law firm to demonstrate in court that in fact that's the case?

Sixth question then: is this not a clear cut example of the Left using the establishment, throwing its weight around and seeking to crush voices of dissent?

As we say back home, I caught Red Ken "cagando y sin papel," for he has no evidence to support his spurious accusation against me. That's why he needs BLM professionals. For the time being I rest my case.



send this article to a friend >>
placeholder
Loading


Keep Vcrisis Online






top | printer friendly version | contact the webmaster J.B. | disclaimer
placeholder
placeholder