O'Kelly Isley III Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 Judging by some of the views on display here it's as well we're in the season for Holy Willie's Prayer.What McKay did is reprehensible and his political career now rightly lies in tatters. I expect he will leave politics in a very short period of time - anything further is a matter for the authorities. The SNP should learn the lesson of heeding signals and acting rather than ignoring them.That should be enough for most folk, but the Guardians Of The Nation's Morals obviously have other ideas; but just what purpose is being served by a bitter frenzy of reactive posts other than adding heat without much in the way of light ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 Fleeing the country after a scandal is old school for public figures, totally forgivable in my book. I'd expect him to consult his constituency party on his return and resign his seat. The victim in this case seems to have handled the unwanted attentions with considerable sang froid and patience, and told the creep to GTF politely, without trauma or even meeting him. That should be the end of the matter imo. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BawWatchin Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 9 minutes ago, Grahame said: The Yes campaign must do better than BawWatchin or that self-proclaimed messiah from Bath. He's wrong probably more times than he's right and was rightly laughed of Pie and Bovril when he joined. His hot tips are usually wrong. I might him telling everyone to bet heavy on Tory or SNP to win Edin South as it was a cert. Ian Murray (Lab) romped home of course. Pie and Bovril of course being the Holy Grail of all knowledge when it comes to all of the rights and wrongs in this world. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BawWatchin Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 1 minute ago, Grahame said: As others have done I'll make this my only reply. Derek McKay searched online and selected a school pupil to bombard with texts of a grooming nature. The only grain of comfort is that 98% of the Yes movement are on nodding terms with basic comprehension. As a collective we strive to shut down those that directly harm the Yes cause like Derek, Tommy and yourself. At no point have I suggested that I agree with what he did. But people should be very careful about the legal terms they use on here or anywhere else, when those terms simply don't apply legally to the situation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inanimate Carbon Rod Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 At no point have I suggested that I agree with what he did. But people should be very careful about the legal terms they use on here or anywhere else, when those terms simply don't apply legally to the situation. Grooming relates to communicating with a child to coerce them into a sexual relationship or other sexual activity. Mr Mackay’s party passed legislation extending the definition of a child to include people under the age of 18, heres some helpful information. Please note this information is from the website of the Scottish government. Who is a child? 21. A child can be defined differently in different legal contexts: In terms of Part 1 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 (which deals with matters including parental rights and responsibilities), a child is generally defined as someone under the age of 18. In terms of Chapter 1 of Part 2 (which deals with support for children and families and includes local authorities' duties in respect of looked after children and children "in need"), a child is also defined as someone under the age of 18. In terms of Chapters 2 and 3 of Part 2 (which dealt with matters including children's hearings and child protection orders), a child means someone who has not attained the age of sixteen years; a child over the age of sixteen years who has not attained the age of eighteen years and in respect of whom a supervision requirement is in force; or a child whose case has been referred to a children's hearing by virtue of section 33 of this Act (Effect of orders etc. made in others parts of the United Kingdom). However, Chapters 2 and 3 of Part 2 have been largely repealed by the Children' s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011, except in relation to certain ongoing cases which are still proceeding under the 1995 Act.The Children's Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011 now contains the current provisions relating to the operation of the Children's Hearings system and child protection orders. Section 199 states that, for the purposes of this Act, a child means a person under 16 years of age. However, this section also provides some exceptions to that general rule. Subsection (2) provides that for the purposes of referrals under section 67(2)(o) (failure to attend school), references in the Act to a child include references to a person who is school age. "School age" has the meaning given in section 31 of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980. Additionally, children who turn 16 during the period between when they are referred to the Reporter and a decision being taken in respect of the referral, are also regarded as "children" under the Act. Children who are subject to compulsory measures of supervision under the Act on or after their 16 th birthday are also treated as children until they reach the age of 18, or the order is terminated (whichever event occurs first). Where a sheriff remits a case to the Principal Reporter under section 49(7)(b) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, then the person is treated as a child until the referral is discharged, any compulsory supervision order made is terminated, or the child turns 18.The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child applies to anyone under the age of 18. However, Article 1 states that this is the case unless majority is attained earlier under the law applicable to the child.The meaning of a child is extended to cover any person under the age of 18 in cases concerning: Human Trafficking; sexual abuse while in a position of trust ( Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009) and the sexual exploitation of children under the age of 18 through prostitution or pornography ( Protection of Children and Prevention of Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2005)When the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 comes into force, a "child" will be defined for the purposes of all Parts of that Act, as someone who has not attained the age of 18. Source https://www.gov.scot/publications/national-guidance-child-protection-scotland/pages/3/ 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirty dingus Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Mackay is a creepy b*****d who needed well punted. Now that's out the way, on the subject of child grooming/abuse how come Bowie wasn't prosecuted for shagging 14yr old Lori Maddox or Bill Wyman for shagging Mandy Smith? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Mackay is a creepy b*****d who needed well punted. Now that's out the way, on the subject of child grooming/abuse how come Bowie wasn't prosecuted for shagging 14yr old Lori Maddox or Bill Wyman for shagging Mandy Smith?We should dig Bowie up and have our own Cadaver Synod. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirty dingus Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 (edited) 9 minutes ago, NotThePars said: We should dig Bowie up and have our own Cadaver Synod. It just seems that musicians seem to get a pass on all the child explotation stuff as it's a bit rock'n'roll/different era/everyone was loaded, so abusing underage girls was seen as just a perk of the business rather than a predatory act. Edited February 18, 2020 by dirty dingus 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hard Graft Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 11 hours ago, BawWatchin said: At no point have I suggested that I agree with what he did. But people should be very careful about the legal terms they use on here or anywhere else, when those terms simply don't apply legally to the situation. Perhaps a charge of Breach of the Peace would be competant. Breach of the Peace is an offence at common law in Scotland. A prosecution for breach of the peace may be brought where someone is accused of disorderly conduct which is liable to cause fear, alarm or disturbance to others. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inanimate Carbon Rod Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Perhaps a charge of Breach of the Peace would be competant. Breach of the Peace is an offence at common law in Scotland. A prosecution for breach of the peace may be brought where someone is accused of disorderly conduct which is liable to cause fear, alarm or disturbance to others.Nah it wouldn’t constitute a breach of the peace. Wouldn’t even see the inside of a court room. Most of these predators act on the fringes of the law knowing how much and how far they can push things before their conduct becomes criminal. If he’s sent hundreds of unsent messages it could be construed as a stalking however in the absence of him physically turning up outside the boys house etc its hard to prove a charge. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FFCinthearea Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 23 hours ago, ICTJohnboy said: Kate Forbes is to be his replacement. Very happy with this appointment - she's very easy on the eye, although that wouldn't have influenced my choice as MacKay's successor of course. She is reasonably hot, but she's also a bible basher. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTJohnboy Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 33 minutes ago, MixuFixit said: She's a wee free isn't she? Not particularly. Quite nicely proportioned if you ask me. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 She can tax my family jewels as much as she likes. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miguel Sanchez Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 4 hours ago, ICTJohnboy said: Not particularly. Quite nicely proportioned if you ask me. 4 hours ago, welshbairn said: She can tax my family jewels as much as she likes. Has John Lambie's Yer Da hijacked your accounts? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 That paper bag over your head emoji is fucking useless. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Heliums Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 22 hours ago, dirty dingus said: Mackay is a creepy b*****d who needed well punted. Now that's out the way, on the subject of child grooming/abuse how come Bowie wasn't prosecuted for shagging 14yr old Lori Maddox or Bill Wyman for shagging Mandy Smith? Different era. The UK Subs had a Top 30 hit in 1979 with a song about a relationship with a 13-year-old. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clockwork Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 Different era. The UK Subs had a Top 30 hit in 1979 with a song about a relationship with a 13-year-old.‘Stranglehold’? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thane of Cawdor Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 Private Eye having, possibly, the last puerile word on this issue. I believe that Dundee has seen an upsurge in quality of poetry since William's day' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastermind Posted February 20, 2020 Author Share Posted February 20, 2020 Any sign of SNP’s Mr Mackay yet? Has there ever been a bigger example of cowardice in Scottish politics than this? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpetmonster Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 Any sign of SNP’s Mr Mackay yet? Has there ever been a bigger example of cowardice in Scottish politics than this? http://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/scottish-conservatives-jackson-carlaw-brexit-u-turn-campaign-leave-1330030%3famp 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.