You little Liar Huhne

Chris Huhne Pleads Guilty Over Penalty Points


The ex-Cabinet minister is standing down as an MP and could face jail after admitting perverting the course of justice.


1:40pm UK, Monday 04 February 2013



Video: Chris Huhne arriving at court with girlfriend Carina Trimingham
Enlarge


Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg says Chris Huhne is right to resign as an MP after admitting perverting the course of justice.

Video: Nick Clegg 'Shocked' By Huhne Case
Enlarge

• 
  
• 
  
  
  
  Chris Huhne is facing a possible jail sentence after admitting lying to police over a speeding offence committed a decade ago.
  
  The former Energy Secretary pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice over claims his ex-wife Vicky Pryce took penalty points so that he could avoid prosecution.
  
  He announced he was quitting as an MP shortly after entering the plea on the first day of the pair's trial at Southwark Crown Court in London.
  
  The dramatic move came just days after he denied the offence at a preliminary hearing last week.
  
  Pryce, a former Government economics adviser, denies a charge of perverting the course of justice. Her case has been adjourned until Tuesday but is expected to proceed.
  
  In a short statement outside the court, Huhne said: "I have pleaded guilty today. I am unable to say more while there is an outstanding trial.
  
  "Having taken responsibility for something which happened 10 years ago, the only proper course of action for me is to resign my Eastleigh seat in Parliament which I will do very shortly.
  
  "That is all I can say today."
  Huhne's ex-wife Vicky Pryce arriving at court
  Perversion of the course of justice carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
  
  Huhne, 58, once seen as a future Lib Dem leader, has been released on unconditional bail and will be sentenced at a later date.
  
  Mr Justice Sweeney made clear in court: "You should have no illusions whatsoever as to the sort of sentence that you are likely to receive."
  
  The politician arrived at the court on Monday with his girlfriend Carina Trimingham, who he admitted having an affair with in 2010.
  
  It was only after their relationship was exposed and his 26-year marriage to Pryce fell apart that the penalty points claims emerged.
  
  Ms Trimingham, a PR adviser, watched from the public gallery as Huhne entered his plea.
  
  The charges date back to March 2003 when Huhne's car was caught speeding on the motorway between Stansted Airport and London.
  
  Huhne stood down from the Cabinet last year, vowing to clear his name.
  
  At the time, he said: "I am innocent of these charges, and I intend to fight this in the courts, and I am confident that a jury will agree."
  
  His departure from the Commons completes the fall from grace that started when the allegations first surfaced early in 2011.
  
  Until then, he had been seen by many as Nick Clegg's natural successor after narrowly losing to him in a leadership contest in 2007.
  
  After the dramatic developments, the party leader said: "This is obviously an extremely serious matter and it is essential that the legal process is now allowed to run its course.
  
  "I am shocked and saddened by what has happened but I believe that Chris Huhne has taken the right decision in resigning as an MP."
  
  The by-election fight for the Eastleigh seat is set to be a bitter clash because it is the first since the coalition formed where the Tories and Lib Dems are the main contenders.
  
  Huhne won with a majority of 3,864 in 2010 but it is viewed as a key target for the Tories.
  
  UKIP leader Nigel Farage has also previously stood for the area and could use the opening to make another run for Parliament.
  
  Party sources said UKIP would be fielding a candidate in Eastleigh and Mr Farage would consider the situation, adding that the constituency was "very close to his heart".
  

Here's some of the texts that his son sent him and he realised they wouldn't go down well with the court (WARNING - contains swear words)

http://order-order.com/2013/02/04/peter-huhnes-texts-to-lying-father/

chrissie wrote:Here's some of the texts that his son sent him and he realised they wouldn't go down well with the court (WARNING - contains swear words)

[url=http://order-order.com/2013/02/04/peter-huhnes-texts-to-lying-father/

http://order-order.com/2013/02/04/peter-huhnes-texts-to-lying-father/[/quote[/url]]

Hi chrissie.....thanks.

What an arrogant selfish Man , was ducking a few penalty points worth all this Huhne? Estranged Family, Career down the pan, Court Expenses, possible jail sentence , wonder what his girlfriend is thinking did he lie to her as well?

He sounds like a disgusting creature. He only pleaded guilty once he knew about the court having access to the texts so as to reduce any sentence. His new girlfriend must be so proud......

Nick Clegg 'Shocked' By Huhne Case

Pull the other one

What is it with East Midlands and lies

chrissie wrote:He sounds like a disgusting creature. He only pleaded guilty once he knew about the court having access to the texts so as to reduce any sentence. His new girlfriend must be so proud......

I don't think there are many George Washingtons in Parliament today chrissie and if his girlfriend has any sense she will ditch him, although I should think she doesn't care, wasn't it she who broke up the marriage.?

jd16 wrote: Nick Clegg 'Shocked' By Huhne Case

Pull the other one

What is it with East Midlands and lies

Hi jd16, not just East Midlands , I despair of Politicians and the way Good Governance has declined. Tony Blair was on T.V. yesterday morning . totally at ease with himself , no shame at all for the 13 years he was in power and told the biggest lies of all.

Panda wrote:

jd16 wrote: Nick Clegg 'Shocked' By Huhne Case

Pull the other one

What is it with East Midlands and lies

Hi jd16, not just East Midlands , I despair of Politicians and the way Good Governance has declined. Tony Blair was on T.V. yesterday morning . totally at ease with himself , no shame at all for the 13 years he was in power and told the biggest lies of all.

You know he was a European Union policy adviser and speech writer for Leon Brittain, and in charge of the EC negotiating team on Chinese and Russian accession talks to the World Trade Organisation. He has quite a colourful history does our nick clegg

I always found it curious his backing of the mccanns. For example, when Leveson's report was being backed by everyone they all only referenced the mccanns but not our nick, He was on Sky going on and on about them and how they have been hounded & need to be protected etc. I've always been highly suspicious of nick clegg and the more I learn about him the more I am realising why

What, do you reckon he too is AC/DC jd16 ? He certainly is no Leader and the LIB Dems have declined since the days of

Shirley Williams and Paddy Ashdown. I cannot think of one Politician who would make a good PM, sad isn't it.!!

Panda wrote:What, do you reckon he too is AC/DC jd16 ? He certainly is no Leader and the LIB Dems have declined since the days of

Shirley Williams and Paddy Ashdown. I cannot think of one Politician who would make a good PM, sad isn't it.!!

Its very sad indeed and I totally agree with you, though Tom Watson is the only MP I would trust. He has put his neck out. As for nick clegg I just see strong connections from his career that are linked to, shall we say, unsaviourary characters. One thing I have learnt is to get to the top, being honest and normal is not the way. Being against child abuse is certainly a big no-no

jd16 wrote:

Panda wrote:What, do you reckon he too is AC/DC jd16 ? He certainly is no Leader and the LIB Dems have declined since the days of

Shirley Williams and Paddy Ashdown. I cannot think of one Politician who would make a good PM, sad isn't it.!!

Its very sad indeed and I totally agree with you, though Tom Watson is the only MP I would trust. He has put his neck out. As for nick clegg I just see strong connections from his career that are linked to, shall we say, unsaviourary characters. One thing I have learnt is to get to the top, being honest and normal is not the way. Being against child abuse is certainly a big no-no

What a terrible indictment of our Politicians, but true. I know Maggie Thatcher was not popular and some of the things she did, like selling off the Railways and all the Utilities I didn't agree with., ,but she was a strong leader and made sure she got a rebate from the EU. Also, to her credit, she hardly claimed expenses apparently, certainly never fiddled them.

This tweet sums it up

@murunbuch
As head of Islington Council, Margaret Hodge ignored children's claims of sexual abuse for 10 yrs. Tony Blair made her Minister for Children

Could Chris Huhne take Nick Clegg or David Cameron with him?


The by-election in Eastleigh brought about by Chris Huhne’s resignation will be fought viciously and will expose every rift in the Coalition








Losing Chris Huhne’s seat would be catastrophic for the Lib Dems and Nick Clegg; but if the Tories fail to win, David Cameron’s leadership will be called into question again Photo: Getty Images






By Peter Oborne

8:23PM GMT 04 Feb 2013

633 Comments




Chris Huhne’s guilty plea at Southwark Crown Court yesterday to the charge of perverting the course of justice was a personal tragedy for him. But it has also created a public nightmare for Mr Huhne’s former Cabinet colleagues, David Cameron and Nick Clegg.


Mr Huhne’s resignation from Parliament forces them to lead their parties into what looks certain to become this century’s most savage and bitter by-election. It comes at the worst imaginable moment, with the Coalition in partial meltdown, and party activists straining at the leash to get at each other’s throats.


For the next few months, Lib Dems and Conservatives will throw money, time and resources into the pitched battle for electoral control of the small south-coast town of Eastleigh, Huhne’s old seat. Never in British political history has a minor traffic offence produced such spectacular consequences.


For activists of both parties, the prospect of all-out war is exhilarating. But for David Cameron and Nick Clegg it is a disaster. They can look forward to a prolonged spell of political schizophrenia. On the one hand, the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister of the Coalition Government are expected to govern Britain in the national interest. On the other hand, as leaders of the Tory party and the Lib Dems, David Cameron and Nick Clegg will be expected to lead their activists into brutal combat. And as we have learnt from events in parliament over the past 12 months, there is scarcely a single issue, from taxation to Europe to constitutional change, on which the two sides agree.


It has been hard enough to brush over these differences in Cabinet. It will be impossible to hide them on the hustings of Eastleigh. The durability of the Coalition will be tested as never before. Its contradictions will be exposed, and I do not feel certain that it can survive the ordeal that lies ahead.



Related Articles

• 
  Chris Huhne: Texts with son reveal breakdown of relationship
  04 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Chris Huhne: Eastleigh by-election would test Coalition parties
  04 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Chris Huhne pleads guilty to perverting course of justice
  04 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Chris Huhne's plea removes a thorn from Nick Clegg's flesh
  04 Feb 2013
  
• 
  How Chris Huhne pleaded innocent - until he was guilty
  04 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Chris Huhne to stand trial over speeding points
  28 Jan 2013
  

I have no doubt that in private the Prime Minister would love to avoid a contest, and allow the Lib Dems a free run. There is excellent historical precedent for this course of action. When Tories and Liberals formed a Coalition in 1918 to confront the economic and social crisis that followed the First World War, the two party leaders agreed that they would not contest each other’s seats.

Liberal prime minister David Lloyd George and Tory leader Andrew Bonar Law jointly signed a letter of endorsement, known as a coupon, for hundreds of candidates who ran under their joint colours. This strategy meant that the two parties could campaign together in relative harmony, and avoid outright confrontation.

And to the disinterested observer, a repeat of the 1918 coupon election is the only sane and rational course of action for the impending by-election in Eastleigh. They should find a candidate committed to making the case for the achievements of the Coalition Government and ready to take on all-comers. Unfortunately, neither the Conservatives nor the Lib Dems are in sane or rational mood.

At Westminster I could find no one who expected the Tories to make the supreme sacrifice, pull out of the contest, and rally behind the Lib Dems. If the Coalition were healthy, perhaps David Cameron and Nick Clegg might indeed find a way to reach such an agreement. Both men probably know they would be wise to do so.

The truth is that the Prime Minister lacks the authority to attempt anything of the sort. The Tory party in its present febrile and disloyal state would not allow it. Mr Cameron’s foot soldiers viscerally dislike the Coalition, and long to wage war on their Lib Dem enemies in Eastleigh (an emotion keenly reciprocated by many Lib Dems).

Mr Cameron’s Conservatives are animated by three main motives, the first of these being their historic hatred and scorn for the Lib Dems – or the “Yellow Peril”, as many Tory MPs now call their Coalition partners.

This tribal bloodlust has become rabid over the past few weeks thanks to an implacable desire for revenge. It will be many, many years before Conservative backbenchers forgive their Coalition allies for what they regard as betrayal over boundary changes – a change of heart from the Lib Dems that will cost the Tories some 20 seats at the election.

The third Conservative motive is more rational. The Tory party regards Eastleigh, which stretches across Hampshire from Southampton to the River Hamble, as being part of its ancestral heartland. It was held from 1955 to 1992 by Sir David Price, an affably undistinguished Old Etonian, former Guards officer. During most of this period the Tories weighed rather than counted the vote.

The unexpected death of Sir David’s replacement, the brilliant but troubled Stephen Milligan, gave the Lib Dems their chance. They grabbed it with both hands in a 1994 by-election called when John Major’s government was at its most despised and unpopular.

So it is hardly surprising that the Conservatives want Eastleigh back so much. It is one of those constituencies they simply have to win if they are to have the slightest chance of an outright majority at the general election.

If the Tories do win Eastleigh – and they lagged by under 4,000 votes at the last general election – the result would come as a massive boost to party morale and a triumphant affirmation of David Cameron.

However, it would be terrible for Nick Clegg if the Lib Dems were to lose. Eastleigh is just one of a score of southern seats they have won from the Tories in the past two decades – and which might topple like a row of dominoes if Eastleigh goes blue.

This is why both sides have to fight so hard. David Cameron’s Tories will regard it as a calamity if they fail to regain the seat, and Nick Clegg’s Lib Dems face disaster if they lose it. Politics being a zero-sum game, victory for one side means a bitter loss for the other.

And so the two parties have secretly had their top strategy teams on the ground in Eastleigh for months. Both the Lib Dems and the Tories believe that the Eastleigh by-election battle will give them a foretaste of the real battle at the general election.

There is just one problem with this approach – and it was spelt out by Benjamin Franklin when he remarked at the signing of the Declaration of Independence: “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”

A brutal by-election in Eastleigh could wreck both parties as the general election draws nearer. This is what makes the possibility that the Ukip leader Nigel Farage might stand look intriguing. With both Lib Dems and Tories so unpopular, Farage could come through the middle on a protest vote. More likely he would cost the Tories enough votes to enable the Lib Dems to limp home.

Meanwhile, Ed Miliband and Labour are laughing. With just 10 per cent of the vote in Eastleigh at the last election, no one will expect Mr Miliband to win. He can play the role of interested bystander, too polite to intrude on private grief, politely watching his opponents tear each other to shreds.

Anyone with a spark of human feeling will feel great sympathy for Chris Huhne. He may have lied and cheated, but only a year ago he was a Cabinet minister, and spoken of as the likely successor to Nick Clegg as Lib Dem party leader. From being one of the most powerful and courted men in Britain he now seems utterly finished – and his downfall stems from what must have seemed at the time a very minor misdemeanour.

It has, however, precipitated one of the most interesting by-elections – and potentially the most important – in British political history. The corpse of Richard III has just been disinterred from a car park in Leicester. It is not impossible that the quiet Hampshire town of Eastleigh could claim a political corpse in the shape of either David Cameron or Nick Clegg.

Peter Oborne said;
"Anyone with a spark of human feeling will feel great sympathy for Chris Huhne. He may have lied and cheated, but only a year ago he was a Cabinet minister, and spoken of as the likely successor to Nick Clegg as Lib Dem party leader. From being one of the most powerful and courted men in Britain he now seems utterly finished – and his downfall stems from what must have seemed at the time a very minor misdemeanour. "

Unquote.

On the contrary, I'm full of sparks of human feeling, but I have not one iota of sympathy for Huhne nor any others who use their influence to break our laws, (the very laws they themselves have played some part in defining) and then attempt to escape retribution.

What would be the outcome of a mere unwashed 'pleb' trying to avoid justice? Would Peter Oborne be writing the same deluded nonsensical comments had the offender been a redundant council house tenant from some revolting sink estate? I think not...

It will never happen because these creatures always circle the wagons, covering each other's backs, but Huhne should face the maximum fine and serve a maximum sentence in the most inaccessible prison for visiting.

These people are our elected representatives and should lead by example, yet all are seen to abuse their undeserved privilege on a regular basis and usually with complete impunity.

He taught the Mccanns all they need to know about lying...he was a good teacher.

It,s not as if he would lose his Licence, it meant 3 points and it was shameful to ask his Wife to lie for him. What puzzles me though is that this happened 10 years ago , but the incident surfaced a couple of years ago. Was it his Wife who shopped him because of the Divorce.?

Hi Panda, that's my understanding of it. She spoke up when she discovered his affair.

Vicky Pryce 'revealed Huhne's speeding points lie to get revenge'


Vicky Pryce, the ex-wife of Chris Huhne, told a newspaper she had taken
speeding points for him to get “revenge” and destroy his career after he left
her for another woman, a jury has been told.








Former Energy Secretary Chris
Huhne and his ex wife Vicky Pryce arrive at Southwark Crown Court Photo: PA





By Gordon Rayner, and Martin
Evans

11:44AM GMT 05 Feb 2013




Miss Pryce was “extremely angry” for the “horrible circumstances” in which
Huhne had ended their 26-year marriage and tipped off the Sunday Times about the
2003 offence, it is claimed.


But her decision to get her own back landed her in the dock of Southwark
Crown Court in London today, where she went on trial accused of perverting the
course of justice when she “consented” to take the speeding points so Huhne
could avoid a driving ban.


Miss Pryce, 60, filled in forms and sent them back to police to falsely claim
she was driving Huhne’s BMW when it was caught speeding by a radar camera on the
M11.


But the Greek-born economist, who was charged under her full name Vasiliki
Pryce, claims she was “coerced” into doing so by Huhne, to whom she was still
married at the time.


She is using the “special defence” of marital coercion, which is only
available to wives who claim they were “deprived of their freedom to choose” by
their husbands.



Related Articles

• 
  Vicky Pryce stands trial over speeding
  points
  05 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Chris Huhne: career in tatters as lies catch up
  with former minister
  04 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Chris Huhne: Texts with son reveal breakdown of
  relationship
  04 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Profile: The millionaire windfarm advocate who
  hankered to lead
  04 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Clegg 'shocked and saddened' by Huhne plea
  
  04 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Chris Huhne: Eastleigh by-election would test
  Coalition parties
  04 Feb 2013
  

^{Vicky Pryce arriving at Southwark Crown Court (Rex
Features)}

But the jury was told that she was in truth a “strong minded and manipulative
woman” who was perfectly capable of exerting her will.

Opening the case for the prosecution, Andrew Edis QC told Southwark Crown
Court in London that Huhne’s deception would never have come to light had it not
been for his decision to leave his wife for his former aide, Carina Trimingham,
in 2010.

He said: “There is no doubt at all that Miss Pryce was distressed, but there
is also no doubt at all that she was extremely angry and that she wanted some
revenge.

“Her revenge was in the end to pass the story about the 2003 crime to the
newspapers so that it would be published in the hope that it would destroy her
husband’s career as a Cabinet minister.

“It was Miss Pryce’s plan that she would get her revenge by putting an end to
all that because she would publish what they had done together in 2003 so she
would get her revenge for the undoubtedly very bad way in which he had treated
her.”

The jury was told that yesterday Huhne pleaded guilty to perverting the
course of justice and quit politics.

Mr Edis said: “He is not a Cabinet minister any more. The plan worked.”

Miss Pryce admitted she was an active participant in Huhne’s attempt to avoid
having three penalty points put on his driving licence.

Mr Edis said: “She agrees that she knew it was going to happen. She
consented.

“The basic facts in this case are largely agreed...so what are we doing here?


“Miss Pryce says that she filled in the form and took the points at a time
when she was married to Mr Huhne, and the law says that if a wife commits an
offence in the presence of her husband and because he has coerced her into it
then she has a defence.”

But he said the jury would have to decide if she is “the sort of woman who is
unable to stand up to her husband or is she the sort of person who is able to
choose what she does”.

Mr Edis told the jury how in 2010 Miss Pryce had been in email contact with
The Sunday Times' political editor Isobel Oakeshott, in the hope of getting the
story into the papers and destroying her ex-husband's career.

In one email Miss Oakeshott proposed running the story in two large
instalments.

She told Miss Pryce that if she was willing to "speak openly about the
offence" it would "inflict maximum and possibly fatal damage against Chris".


Miss Pryce replied: "I have no doubt that I definitely want to nail him, more
than ever actually and would love to do it soon."

But Mr Edis explained that she was concerned that by speaking out she risked
being prosecuted herself.

In another email Miss Oakeshott told Miss Pryce that she might be able to
avoid prosecution by portraying herself as the victim.

She wrote: "I think you could make yourself out very much to be the
honourable one saying that it had been on your conscience ever since but you
were bullied into it."

Mr Edis asked the jury to consider whether Miss Pryce, who was a senior civil
servant and successful economist, was the sort of woman who could be easily
bullied or whether she was a "manipulative woman who is very capable of making
up her own mind".

The court also heard how Miss Pryce taped a telephone call with her
ex-husband in an attempt to get him to confess to the offence.

But Mr Huhne was suspicious and admitted nothing during the conversation.


Mr Edis said: "She is trying to get this confession out of him. You may come
to the conclusion that these phone conversations are two manipulative people
trying unsuccessfully to manipulate each other."

The charge against Miss Pryce states that between March 12 and May 21, 2003,
she "falsely informed the authorities" that she was the driver of a vehicle
travelling at excess speed, causing her licence to be endorsed with three
penalty points, “intending to pervert the course of justice”.

She was charged in February last year after a nine-month investigation by
Essex Police which was launched after allegations about the speeding ticket were
first reported in newspapers.

Mr Edis said the “temptation to pervert the course of justice might confront
every married couple” in such circumstances, and “it might seem it doesn’t
matter”.

Ultimately, however, it does matter, he added, because “the whole point of a
criminal justice system is that it needs to work for everyone’s good and it
won’t work if everybody fiddles it”.

Huhne will be sentenced after the conclusion of Miss Pryce’s trial and has
been warned he may be jailed. The maximum sentence for the offence is life
imprisonment.

What did I just this minute say?

chrissie wrote:Hi Panda, that's my understanding of it. She spoke up when she discovered his affair.

Quite an interesting article chrissie and Miss Oakeshott hasn't come out of this very well .!!
"In another email Miss Oakeshott told Miss Pryce that she might be able to
avoid prosecution by portraying herself as the victim.

She wrote: "I think you could make yourself out very much to be the
honourable one saying that it had been on your conscience ever since but you
were bullied into it"

I have to say that they are both as bad as each other imo. There was no need to break the law in the first place.

chrissie wrote:I have to say that they are both as bad as each other imo. There was no need to break the law in the first place.

I agree chrissie, for a measly 3 points he has lost everything, his Career, the respect of his Son, the gossip of the people, and a possible jail sentence......I don't feel sorry for him.

I watched the proceedings on the news earlier and Huhne's ex really is vindictive , hell hath no fury like a Woman scorned as they say. She alleged that he forced her to have an abortion in the early days of their Marriage and even had to have a go at Huhnes' new Partner saying she was bi-sexual.!!!

Jury discharged in Vicky Pryce trial after failing to reach verdict


Vicky Pryce is to face a retrial after a jury failed to reach a verdict and
showed “fundamental deficits of understanding” of her case.








Vicky Pryce admits she has gone
through a 'horrible' divorce from the disgraced MP Chris Huhne Photo: Clara
Molden





By Gordon Rayner, Chief
Reporter

2:41PM GMT 20 Feb 2013




The eight women and four men on the jury at Southwark Crown Court in London
were discharged after telling the judge it was “highly unlikely” they would ever
reach agreement on whether or not Miss Pryce was guilty of perverting the course
of justice.


She will now face a new trial before a different jury starting on Monday.



The jury reached deadlock after sending the judge three separate notes
containing 10 questions which suggested they were “struggling” with the most
“basic concept” of trial by jury.


They included a question about whether they could reach a verdict based on
something which was not presented in court, and whether the defendant’s
“religious conviction” to follow her wedding vows of obeying her then husband,
Chris Huhne, would be reason enough to acquit her of committing a crime with
him.


Mr Justice Sweeney said he had “never come across” anything like the jury’s
response in nearly 30 years of working in criminal courts.



Related Articles

• 
  Vicky Pryce trial: the 10 questions the jury
  asked
  20 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Chris Huhne 'will only be remembered for being in
  Brixton nick', says Michael Gove
  20 Feb
  2013
  

Chris Huhne, who had pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice on
the day he was due to stand trial alongside his ex-wife, must now wait until the
end of her new trial before finding out his sentence.

Miss Pryce, 60, was charged with the same offence as her husband after she
admitted taking speeding points for him to help him avoid a driving ban, but she
relied on the ancient defence of marital coercion, saying she had been pressured
into it by Huhne.

The judge had given the jury lengthy verbal and written directions about the
meaning of marital coercion before they retired to consider their verdict last
Thursday, but on Tuesday afternoon the notes were passed to the judge with the
10 questions.

One question asked the judge to define “reasonable doubt”, another asked if
they could “speculate” on information not presented in evidence.

The jury also asked: “Can a juror come to a verdict based on a reason that
was not presented in court and has no facts or evidence to support it?”

Andrew Edis QC, prosecuting, suggested to the judge that he should discharge
the jury there and then, saying: “This is a jury which has not, it appears,
understood its function.”

He added: “It is surprising they are still struggling with this very basic
concept of jury trial...there is a substantial concern about whether the jury
has sufficiently grasped its task to be permitted safely to continue it”.

He suggested that if the “eyes of the world” were not on the case the judge
would already have discharged the jury.

The judge said: “Quite apart from my concern about the absolute fundamental
deficits of understanding which the questions demonstrate I wonder [given that
the answer] is all there and has been there the whole time the extent to which
anything said by me is going to be capable of getting them back on track again.


“I am like Mr Edis in the position that after 30 years of criminal trials I
have never come across this at this late stage. Never.”

But Julian Knowles QC, defending, argued that the jury should be allowed to
carry on deliberating, following further guidance from the judge, as they had
not broken any rules and were clearly giving the case a lot of thought.

Mr Justice Sweeney said that if the jury convicted Miss Pryce, she would
“undoubtedly” appeal the verdict because of the questions they asked, but in the
absence of “misconduct or irregularity” on the jury’s part, they should be
allowed to carry on deliberating once he had answered their questions.

He repeatedly referred them back to his earlier directions and said that the
question of religious conviction was “with respect” anything to do with the
case.

Asked to define reasonable doubt, he said it was “a doubt that is
reasonable”, adding: “These are ordinary English words that the law does not
allow me to help you with.”

He also told them that he would accept a majority verdict on which at least
10 of them were agreed.

But less than two hours later, after more than 15 hours of deliberations in
total, the jury sent the judge another note saying they had reached stalemate.


Mr Justice Sweeney told the jury: "I have received a note which indicated
that it is, and I quote, 'highly unlikely', underlined, that you are going to
reach even a majority verdict and it is helpful that you have set out the state
of play, and I'm grateful for that.

"Against the background of the amount of time you have been out already, it
is my decision that I must discharge you from further deliberations."


===========================
I wonder where thw Jurors came from , I would have thought this case was not so difficult to understand.!!!

}

Vicky Pryce trial: Guilty of perverting the
course of justice



Vicky Pryce has been found guilty of perverting the course of justice by
taking her ex-husband Chris Huhne's speeding points.








Vicky Pryce: a quest for revenge brought her
down



Chris Huhne: the liar who hankered to lead




Carina Trimingham: former journalist who fell for
Huhne



Judge Constance Briscoe could be prosecuted for
'lying to police'



Defence of marital coercion could soon
disappear





Vicky Pryce trial: Emails that reveal plot to
'nail' cheating Chris Huhne




Interactive: Vicky Pryce’s determination to bring down her ex-husband
Chris Huhne in revenge for his affair is laid bare in a series of emails that
were shown to the jury.








Taped call between Pryce and Huhne

Vicky Pryce’s determination to bring down her ex-husband Chris Huhne in
revenge for his affair is laid bare in a series of emails that were shown to the
jury.











By Sam Marsden

2:46PM GMT 07 Mar 2013





Over two months in the spring of 2011, she plotted in detail with a leading
journalist about how a newspaper could run a story exposing how Huhne forced her
to take speeding points for him so he would not lose his licence.


Pryce, 60, discussed at length ways of providing proof of what the former
cabinet minister did in 2003 while protecting herself from possible prosecution.



The 59 pages of emails, which were released by the Crown Prosecution Service
at the end of her trial, illustrate her emotional turmoil in the months after
Huhne, 58, left her for his former PR adviser, Carina Trimingham, 46.


They also explain how Isabel Oakeshott, political editor of The Sunday Times,
came to break the speeding points story on May 8 2011 that eventually ended
Huhne’s once-promising political career.


Pryce wrote to Miss Oakeshott on March 3: “I have no doubt as I definitely
want to nail him. More than ever actually and would love to do it soon.”




Related Articles

• 
  Taped call between Pryce and Huhne
  07 Mar 2013
  
• 
  Jury in Vicky Pryce trial retire to consider
  verdict
  14 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Vicky Pryce 'is not a bloodless superwoman', says
  barrister
  13 Feb 2013
  
• 
  Vicky Pryce could not have been reduced to such a
  'quivering jelly', court told
  12 Feb 2013
  

However, a fortnight later, on March 17, she had got cold feet and was
refusing to be named as the source for the article.

“No way am I going to be involved in a story that came from me. The source is
CT [Carina Trimingham]. Unless that is clear then I can’t do it,” she wrote.


Many of the emails were sent by Pryce late at night. One, dating from March 6
2011, is littered with typing mistakes. She apologised for her falling asleep
while writing the message and accidentally pressing the send button before she
had corrected the errors.

Miss Oakeshott had to cajole and encourage Pryce to provide the on-the-record
corroboration that she needed to be able to run the story.

She wrote on March 8: “The bottom line is that this story WILL bring Chris
down, IF you are willing to go on the record about what happened with the minor
risk that this carries.”

The emails also show how upset Pryce still was about the breakdown of her
marriage and her overwhelming anger towards Huhne.

On March 4 she complained about the “bad economics” her ex-husband, then the
energy secretary, had used in a speech the previous day warning that oil prices
could soar.

The next day Pryce wrote to Miss Oakeshott suggesting that Huhne had made his
fortune through “dodgy investments” and by relying on his wife’s much greater
income.

She said: “The reason he was able to build property portfolio and fund his
political ambitions has very little to do with him ‘making millions in the City’
which he didn’t and a lot to do with me.”

Pryce also alleged that she had told senior Liberal Democrats about Huhne
making her accept his speeding penalties.

On April 9 she wrote to Miss Oakeshott: “I had told Vince [Cable] and Rachel
[his wife] about points before when the three of us were having supper about a
month ago.”

However, she added: “They were horrified at the time but VC has probably
forgotten it by now. He was v tired that night.”

Other emails were sent between Mail on Sunday journalists and Constance
Briscoe, a judge and neighbour of Huhne and Pryce in Clapham, south London, who
was advising Pryce about her contact with the media.