Max Clifford After Release

[smurfchops]

Well his business is closing, his wife is supposedly divorcing him, what will happen to him when he is released? I reckon he will sell up whatever he has over here and fade away to Spain or somewhere with his daighter. Who were the people who stood with him outside court? How the mighty fall ... He thought he was untouchable.

[jno]

divebuddy, the considerations for consecutive v concurrent sentences are here:

http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/Definitive_guideline_TICs__totality_Final_web.pdf

(Consecutive): "offences that are of the same or similar kind but where the overall criminality will not sufficiently be reflected by concurrent sentences.

Examples include:
where offences committed against different people, such as repeated thefts involving attacks on several different shop assistants"

The judge's thinking seems to reflect this okay.

[Stargazer]

I bet that elderly (naming no names) Coronation Street actor is glad that his trial preceded Clifford's otherwise his victim's may have been given more credence rather than making out that they were making it all up. Coincidence that none of them knew each other and yet all had almost idential stories to tell about his modus operandi.

[whirlyhurly]

My thoughts exactly Stargazer.

[mikey4444]

To be honest, I couldn't give a flying ferkin where he goes as long as his smirking and irritating face isn't in the media every day. A period of complete silence from this horrible man would be much appreciated. Perhaps now that he is enjoying a sojourn at Her Majesties pleasure, we can stop talking about him.

[Peter Pedant]

jno - useful limk - thanks .... yeah but no but

Doesnt the sentencing have to be according to the date at which the offences were done - and so the question becomes - does it reflect the criminality of 19-sixty ecks ? One could answer that by looking at contemporary sentences - men sentenced in the sixties.

and those points I would have thought would found an appeal ( after all he has the money to fund one ha ha! )

[jno]

the actual sentence has to reflect the limits available at the time; so you can't send someone up for 20 years now if the maximum was 2 then. But I'm not sure you could find many defendants in a similar situation back in the 70s - facing a series of charges of historic crimes - to find out what sentencing policies were (chances are, then as now, a lot would depend on who was the judge).

Besides which, the actual alternative would for him to have been charged with each crime as it was committed - so questions of concurrent/consecutive wouldn't have arisen in his case at all.

I think the judge acted as per guidelines. But I won't be surprised if this forms the basis of an appeal, in which case I'll just have to see if an appeal court agrees with me.

[scooping]

Really not a good idea for ABers to name others they might think could have acted in a similar way to Clifford. It is highly libellous and extremely stupid.

[Nibble]

A safe bet would be that the US will deffo be off limis, due to HIS moral turpitude...


As crime of “moral turpitude,” which in general is a
crime with an intent to steal or defraud; a crime
where physical harm is done or threatened; a crime
where serious physical harm is caused by reckless
behavior; or a crime of sexual misconduct.

[mikey4444]

The difficulty with being banned from the shores of the United States is that so many flights to other places go via America, and if he was banned from going to America, it would include transiting the country as well. Try to get to Hawaii, without landing in an American airport, for instance. Most of the Caribean cruises that my friends have taken entailed flying to Miami first.

But I don't think he is going anywhere for quite a while. Already he is being investigated for other offences, and if Stuart Hall is anything to go by, he may very well be in for more than the original 8 years.

That's unless some tw*t in the Prison Service doesn't let him "by mistake"
a la Skull Cracker.

[jeffa]

"Try to get to Hawaii without landing in an American airport"

Where to begin, where to begin... :-)

[mikey4444]

Yes, of course guys...I wasn't thinking straight.... I feel just a tad silly now !

But I guess my point still stands.

[jeffa]

The moral turpitude is a guideline for filling in the Visa Waiver. If you fall under it, then you are not entitled to enter US territory without a visa, but that doesn't stop you applying for a visa! Generally speaking, the more money you have and the more famous you are, the more likely you are to succeed. Viz Pete Townsend...

[mikey4444]

jeffa...you may indeed be right about money talking, but Clifford is now poisoned goods. He has the touch of death about him. When he eventually gets out of gaol, it will be a very brave American official that grants him any kind of Visa.

But I suppose that is always Clacton or Cleethorpes to consider for future hols.

[Bazile]

Did they eventually let Nigela Lawson in again ? ( of course the gravity of the two cases are far apart )