THE LAST DITCH

Labour politician resigned after admitting taking cocaine – Telegraph.

If a dealer told the drugs squad that you were a user, how would you expect them to react? It seems that the answer is "it depends." Most of us could expect them to seek corroborating evidence and prosecute us. A member of the Labour Party however, can expect to be tipped off, warned of the possibility of blackmail and advised to delete any incriminating images on his mobile phone. Perhaps someone should remind the officers of the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency that they are employed to serve justice, not Labour politicians. Being brought to trial for conspiring to pervert the course of justice might do the trick.

I don't care that Steven Purcell took cocaine. Frankly, I wish every statist busybody would drug him or herself into addled harmlessness. But for so long as the law controls drug use, it should be applied equally to all. After all, I seem to recall reading somewhere that the Labour Party favours "equality." If he had a gramme of intellectual consistency, Steven Purcell would present a signed confession and insist on being prosecuted. Then he might (though I still doubt it) aspire to treatment "equal" to that the SCDEA would give the mugs who vote for him.

9 responses to “One law for them, another for us.”

  1. Jack Savage Avatar
    Jack Savage

    As yet, I do not think it is a crime to have taken cocaine in the past.
    However, it probably soon will be!

    Like

  2. Alexander De Large Avatar
    Alexander De Large

    Justice is not a person to be served as a man is served. That idea is just ridiculous. That these bad laws should be enforced equally is also ridiculous.. Anyone who can get away with beating prohibition should do so, and people who condemn everyone to obey bad laws ‘just because they are there’ needs to think again. Seriously.

    Like

  3. john Avatar
    john

    Well I would take the opposite view, that prosecuting someone in this position whether they are a pauper or a politician is an abject waste of resources that should always be avoided.

    Like

  4. Tom Paine Avatar

    All offences are "in the past" Jack. Something tells me the limitation period on this one is very fresh.

    Like

  5. Tom Paine Avatar

    I would abolish this law, of course. That does not alter the fact that selective enforcement is unjust and in this case corrupt.

    Like

  6. Tom Paine Avatar

    Can only a person be served, Alexander? What of all those honours conferred for service to country, charity or the arts for example? I would legalise drugs. In my view, adults’ bodies are their own to use or abuse as they please. Provided, of course, that they are prepared to face any consequences alone and to take full responsibility for all they do under the influence.
    Civil disobedience – openly defying unjust laws and proudly taking the consequences – is one thing. It’s very different however from a politician accepting the corrupt protection of a police force tasked with enforcing the laws his party advocates.

    Like

  7. Tom Paine Avatar

    It would not be surprising to find that politicians at no risk of being unseated by an uncritical heartlands electorate were occasionally to hang out with colourful characters or even accept their favours. In the absence of more evidence, however, we must wait for this interesting story to unfold.
    Yet another reason for Gordon Brown to cut and run perhaps? Although, judging by recent opinion polls, the more badly Labour politicians behave, the more this odd electorate likes them!

    Like

  8. Jock Avatar

    Hmmm – I thought that if the suggestion is that he took a banned substance that was not actually evidence of a crime. I thought it was possession for which you could get done, which is next to impossible after the fact of course.
    So whilst I agree with all you say about the law being applied equally, and the drugs laws being an arse anyway, I’m not sure that there was much they could or should have done.
    On the other hand, if the dealing scrote has actually threatened some kind of blackmail, then I would have thought informing the intended victim might be something they ought to do.
    No? Am I wrong on the difference between possession and consumption?

    Like

Leave a reply to Old Holborn Cancel reply

Tom is a retired international lawyer. He was a partner in a City of London law firm and spent almost twenty years abroad serving clients from all over the world.

Returning to London on retirement in 2011, he was dismayed to discover how much liberty had been lost in the UK while he was away.

He’s a classical liberal (libertarian, if you must) who, like his illustrious namesake, considers that

“…government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one.”

Latest comments
  1. Lord T's avatar

    They are servants. Just not of the public. He gets a full pension because he did his job for his…

  2. alec5384's avatar
  3. Lord T's avatar
  4. tom.paine's avatar
  5. Lord T's avatar