Computer hacker with AS awaits extradition to the US

[Karen A]

Would you be happy to see a British citizen extradited to Iran and trialled in an Iranian court for dropping a sweet wrapper on the pavement outside the Iranian embassy in London ten years ago? If found guilty he will be hanged in public from the hook of a crane.

 

I can assure you that the law on littering as it stands in Britain does not allow for such a punishment. If Britain were to implement an extradition treaty with Iran in the future then it is very possible that the aforementioned scenario may indeed materialise. The Iranian government might interpret the crime as an attack on Iran. Britain already has sufficient laws to prosecute people for littering pavements with sweet wrappers.

 

Surely the example you give is not relevant.I would think that the area outside of the Iranian embassy in Britain is still in Britain.Perhaps if someone deliberately went into the Iranian embassey and dumped a load of rubbish in the living room there might be a case.Karen.

 

[bid]

DH says the sovereign territory of embassies extends to the gates, and possibly any steps, but not the pavement.

 

Bid

[baddad]

Would you be happy to see a British citizen extradited to Iran and trialled in an Iranian court for dropping a sweet wrapper on the pavement outside the Iranian embassy in London ten years ago? If found guilty he will be hanged in public from the hook of a crane.

 

I can assure you that the law on littering as it stands in Britain does not allow for such a punishment. If Britain were to implement an extradition treaty with Iran in the future then it is very possible that the aforementioned scenario may indeed materialise. The Iranian government might interpret the crime as an attack on Iran. Britain already has sufficient laws to prosecute people for littering pavements with sweet wrappers.

 

If the iranian government interpreted a dropped sweet wrapper on a london street as an attack against iran they would need to politely advised that they were being a bit oversensitive... But we are not talking about innocently dropped sweetie wrappers outside of embassies or anything anywhere near that silly, are we? We are talking about a deliberate hack into American defence computers and the deletion of sensitive/secret data. We don't need to know anything about the nature of that data, only that they considered it secret and sensitive and therefore kept it in what they believed to be a secure location. We also don't need to know anything about how flawed the integrity of that supposedly secure location might be - as it's irrelevent whether they were using the 'firewall' equivalent' of Fort Knox or a Woolworth's padlock: the very fact that it had to be picked and that the person picking it had not been issued with a key is evidence of a criminal act and criminal intent.

Sweetie wrappers outside of embassies is one absurdity/hacking into defence computers for kicks is another. To suggest that the first absurdity is in any way comparable with the second is, erm, absurd!

 

[smiley1590]

like the AS and MH probs (anger ,violence ,agression self-harm) history! of nail bomber! could you use AS as excuse or defence that didn;t understand what they was doing? could go either way though this one did have LD'S with AS and MH probs so that probably didn't help his state of mind and problems he got obsessed with islam religion and beliefs! he coverted tells you more on this link with information! his mum was full tiime carer cause AS,MH probs! his mum was so shocked he could do this!

 

http://actionforautism.co.uk/2008/10/16/ni...iminal-defence/

 

[smiley1590]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/7664316.stm

 

video of mother speaking out on how she feels and what she thinks happened behind this!

[call me jaded]

I have previously stated that US law does not apply in Britain and the extradition treaty was not in force at the time he committed the offences.

 

You might also be interested in knowing that the EU thinks its law applies in the US and every other non-EU country. In 2003, the EU demanded that e-commerce companies based outside of EU countries start charging EU VAT on sales to customers in EU countries, then hand over the revenue collected to the EU. An American friend runs an internet based business and DOES NOT charge VAT on sales of IT services and digital material sold on the internet to EU customers. He says there is no legislation in US Federal Law or the State Law of Indiana demanding that he charges VAT to EU customers, and EU law does not apply in the US. Only if there are changes in the law on his side of the Atlantic will he start charging VAT to EU customers. In the US, IT services and digital material bought on the internet are exempt from state Sales Tax. My friend has told me that if a reciprocal extradition treaty between the US and Britain was in force, then he (and thousands of other Americans) could theoretically be extradited to Britain and trialled in a British court for tax evasion under British and EU law.

 

No, your purchase is going through the 'nothing to declare' green lane at customs when it should be stopping at the red one. In theory you should be phoning HMRC and telling them you have a shipment coming in. Here's an explanation from someone who also did a six month law module

[Canopus]

Surely the example you give is not relevant.I would think that the area outside of the Iranian embassy in Britain is still in Britain.Perhaps if someone deliberately went into the Iranian embassey and dumped a load of rubbish in the living room there might be a case.Karen.

 

If the iranian government interpreted a dropped sweet wrapper on a london street as an attack against iran they would need to politely advised that they were being a bit oversensitive... But we are not talking about innocently dropped sweetie wrappers outside of embassies or anything anywhere near that silly, are we?

 

You don't get it do you. In 1999 I witnessed what I think was a British citizen drop a sweet wrapper right outside the entrance of the Iranian embassy in London and the event was caught on a CCTV camera belonging to the embassy. Big deal you might think. However, the wrapper had some of the sweet stuck on it and the sweet in question contained pork gelatine. I happen to know some Iranians who have reliably assured me that pork and its derivatives are illegal in Iran and the penalties for throwing pork products in the street are draconian. The Iranian government could decide that throwing pork products outside their embassy in London is just as illegal as throwing them in the streets of Tehran, and therefore will result in a trial in an Iranian court with a maximum penalty of being hanged in public rather than a fine for dropping litter imposed by the British government.

 

[Canopus]

No, your purchase is going through the 'nothing to declare' green lane at customs when it should be stopping at the red one. In theory you should be phoning HMRC and telling them you have a shipment coming in. Here's an explanation from someone who also did a six month law module

 

IT services and digital material sold on the internet are things like asking somebody to write a program to solve equations emailed to you as an executable file or some graphics downloaded as .png files. They are non-physical products delivered via the internet and do not pass through customs like physical goods do.

 

[baddad]

You don't get it do you. In 1999 I witnessed what I think was a British citizen drop a sweet wrapper right outside the entrance of the Iranian embassy in London and the event was caught on a CCTV camera belonging to the embassy. Big deal you might think. However, the wrapper had some of the sweet stuck on it and the sweet in question contained pork gelatine. I happen to know some Iranians who have reliably assured me that pork and its derivatives are illegal in Iran and the penalties for throwing pork products in the street are draconian. The Iranian government could decide that throwing pork products outside their embassy in London is just as illegal as throwing them in the streets of Tehran, and therefore will result in a trial in an Iranian court with a maximum penalty of being hanged in public rather than a fine for dropping litter imposed by the British government.

No - you don't get it!

 

Your flight of fancy involves loads of 'possibles' and an unreasonable interpretation of those possibles. The hacking involves a deliberate illegal act knowingly undertaken against the US government. If somebody knew that throwing pork pies in iran was illegal and that the penalties were draconian and then they knowingly entered iranian territory and threw pork pies they'd be pretty much inviting whatever consequences came their way! Even if they hurled an unexploded pork pie though the embassy window and then detonated it remotely from a secret bunker in Belgium they would still be inviting whatever consequences came their way...

Now if someone walked into the Iranian embassy eating a pork pie, and it was fairly obvious that he hadn't intended any offence and that he genuinely wasn't aware of the ramifications/implications of eating pork pies on Iranian soil then - fair do's - give the sucker a break.

But in the case in question, the guy did know he was hurling pork pies where they shouldn't be hurled, did know the implications (i.e. that it was illegal - lets not back track to speculating about whether he knew 'how illegal')of his pork pie hurling activities and did know the offence it would cause. And then (in deleting files) he quite openly asked 'can I have some mustard for my pork pie, please?'

 

I really have got to stop looking at this thread - it's starting to sound like i have no sympathy whatsoever with the guy - which if you look at my first couple of posts is not the case at all... i just think there is a big difference between sympathy and denial, and it's not a bridge i'm prepared to cross purely on the basis of other people's prejudices about the US government... and that's not even to say that I entirely disagree with those prejudices - just that they do not seem valid in this very cut and dry scenario...

 

L&P

 

BD

 

[Karen A]

You don't get it do you. In 1999 I witnessed what I think was a British citizen drop a sweet wrapper right outside the entrance of the Iranian embassy in London and the event was caught on a CCTV camera belonging to the embassy. Big deal you might think. However, the wrapper had some of the sweet stuck on it and the sweet in question contained pork gelatine. I happen to know some Iranians who have reliably assured me that pork and its derivatives are illegal in Iran and the penalties for throwing pork products in the street are draconian. The Iranian government could decide that throwing pork products outside their embassy in London is just as illegal as throwing them in the streets of Tehran, and therefore will result in a trial in an Iranian court with a maximum penalty of being hanged in public rather than a fine for dropping litter imposed by the British government.

 

I never said I did get it.

However my partner mentioned the article in the link below to me today.

It is an excellent example of how a foreign country can arrest individuals who behave in a way that is considered inappropriate even where the British Government would never consider the issue was a problem.

I am sure there are plenty of individuals in Britain who have dressed in nun costumes at one time or another.

I am also sure the footballers did not expect to end up in court.

I don't think that the Greek government has a specific agenda regarding Britains dressed as nuns.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/eu...rs-1690767.html

 

 

[Canopus]

Now if someone walked into the Iranian embassy eating a pork pie, and it was fairly obvious that he hadn't intended any offence and that he genuinely wasn't aware of the ramifications/implications of eating pork pies on Iranian soil then - fair do's - give the sucker a break.

 

And if the Iranian government decides to extradite the individual for this crime several years later AFTER imposing an extradition treaty which did not exist at the time the offence was committed, then he is Gary McKinnon Mk2. The facts are that ignorance is no defence in the eyes of the law and the severity of the crime is also immaterial. An extradition is an extradition regardless of whether it is for deliberately hacking US government computers or the possession of pork products on Iranian soil.

 

I really have got to stop looking at this thread - it's starting to sound like i have no sympathy whatsoever with the guy - which if you look at my first couple of posts is not the case at all... i just think there is a big difference between sympathy and denial, and it's not a bridge i'm prepared to cross purely on the basis of other people's prejudices about the US government... and that's not even to say that I entirely disagree with those prejudices - just that they do not seem valid in this very cut and dry scenario...

 

The pending extradition of Gary McKinnon has created an atmosphere of fear hanging over Britain. There is now a possibility that British citizens could be extradited to the US in the future and face trial there because they did something that upset Uncle Sam BEFORE the extradition treaty came into force.

 

[bid]

Canopus!

 

Aarrgghh!!

 

The pavement outside any embassy is not their sovereign territory so you can drop whatever you like on it!!

 

I'm gonna leave this thread, too, 'cos it's getting down right silly!

 

Bid :ol:

[call me jaded]

IT services and digital material sold on the internet are things like asking somebody to write a program to solve equations emailed to you as an executable file or some graphics downloaded as .png files. They are non-physical products delivered via the internet and do not pass through customs like physical goods do.

 

Intellectual property is non-tangible but still has a monetary value that HMRC still have an entitlement to collect tax on. It is, of course, much much more difficult for them to track than if there is a package coming through Royal Mail. The principle still applies that it is the purchaser who had a duty to declare.

 

I'm reliably informed that Intellectual Property lawyers are the best paid.

[call me jaded]

You don't get it do you. In 1999 I witnessed what I think was a British citizen drop a sweet wrapper right outside the entrance of the Iranian embassy in London and the event was caught on a CCTV camera belonging to the embassy. Big deal you might think. However, the wrapper had some of the sweet stuck on it and the sweet in question contained pork gelatine. I happen to know some Iranians who have reliably assured me that pork and its derivatives are illegal in Iran and the penalties for throwing pork products in the street are draconian. The Iranian government could decide that throwing pork products outside their embassy in London is just as illegal as throwing them in the streets of Tehran, and therefore will result in a trial in an Iranian court with a maximum penalty of being hanged in public rather than a fine for dropping litter imposed by the British government.

 

What utter tosh. You are doing my Iranian friends a dis-service.

 

[call me jaded]

BD just how would you get them there pork pies in to Iran?

[Kathryn]

Serious alert!

 

This thread has entered the realms of the surreal. Pork pies, Iran? Sweet wrappers?

 

Please keep to the original topic or the maximum penalty will be imposed upon this thread.

 

Judge K x

[Karen A]

And if the Iranian government decides to extradite the individual for this crime several years later AFTER imposing an extradition treaty which did not exist at the time the offence was committed, then he is Gary McKinnon Mk2. The facts are that ignorance is no defence in the eyes of the law and the severity of the crime is also immaterial. An extradition is an extradition regardless of whether it is for deliberately hacking US government computers or the possession of pork products on Iranian soil.

 

 

 

The pending extradition of Gary McKinnon has created an atmosphere of fear hanging over Britain. There is now a possibility that British citizens could be extradited to the US in the future and face trial there because they did something that upset Uncle Sam BEFORE the extradition treaty came into force.

 

No I do not agree.

I think that the frenzy around this case which is being built up by various groups in order to peddle their numerous and various agendas may be attempting to create an atmosphere of fear.

I read the paper daily and listen to several radio stations.

I have not come across any mention of Gary McKinnon.He is the unfortunate individual who is being used by others to pedal agendas.

I do say unfortunate despite having said all of the other things I posted because I think he is being used to make a point.

Even in this thread he has hardly been mentioned.

The Forum is an ASD Forum.My interest in this case is with regard to ASD.I have little interest in politics.

If Gary Mckinnon has ASD then various groups are guilty of manipulating a vulnerable individual to pedal their own agendas.Which is somewhat of a doulble standard given that Gary Mckinnon was supposed to not be able to judge whether computer hacking was illegal.

 

If Gary Mckinnon is an adult with AS and has made an error that people believe is related to ASD there are plenty of things that they could become involved in.They could push for better awareness of ASD in the work place,they could push for improved support for adults with ASD or they could become invloved in ensuring that appropriate suppport is in place for those with ASD within the judicial system.There are currently large numbers of individuals in prison in this country with learning difficulties or mental illness because of lack of alternative provision.I think these issues are issues that those who have an interest in ASD could become invlolved in and should feel concerned about.

 

I think there is an atmosphere in Britain.In my part of Britain vast numbers of people are worried that they will not have a job by the end of the week.

In Britain as a whole a frenzy surrounds payments for MPs in all of the parties and by far the biggest frenzy surrounds whether Susan Boyle can sing.

Where I live there are few British citizens whose main worry is future extradition to the US.Karen.

Edited May 27, 2009 by Karen A

[mossgrove]

Sorry to drag this thread back on topic when you were all having so much fun, but when someone suddenly discovers Autism or Aspergers only at the point where they want a legal defence in court it worries me. I don't know the man concerned and it is possible that what happened was at least partially related to an undiagnosed condition. But it is also possible that Autism is being used to justify wrongdoing, and it certainy wouldn't be the first time that has happened.

 

Simon

Edited May 27, 2009 by mossgrove

[Tempus]

I personally don't think that autism should enter into this matter at all -- however the US has a less-than-adequate reputation for it's prison and justice system and I think that extraditing somebody to the US for a crime such as this is wrong. He should be tried in a UK court, under UK law and if necessary jailed in a UK prison (somewhere where rights are at least considered to exist).

[NobbyNobbs]

The pending extradition of Gary McKinnon has created an atmosphere of fear hanging over Britain. There is now a possibility that British citizens could be extradited to the US in the future and face trial there because they did something that upset Uncle Sam BEFORE the extradition treaty came into force.

where? i've heard a lot of talk of politics, and a lot of talk of fears and worries recently, but its certainly not about that. it seems to now be an excuse for America-haters to jump up and down and bang their drums.

 

i put this mans AS-based defense up there with the boy on britains got talent whose parents are desperately selling their story trying to convince the public he needs to go to a fancy private stage school to help with his AS because it helps with his concentration. its a convienient excuse to get what you want. (and i'm not questioning the authenticity of either diagnosis, just the use to which they have put it).

[smiley1590]

what boy on britains got talent? what this series?! never heard that!

 

XXKLX

[NobbyNobbs]

callum francis

 

the daily mail said he had been cured of autism. the main story was sold to the news of the world, you can google it using his name and the word autism

[Karen A]

where? i've heard a lot of talk of politics, and a lot of talk of fears and worries recently, but its certainly not about that. it seems to now be an excuse for America-haters to jump up and down and bang their drums.

 

i put this mans AS-based defense up there with the boy on britains got talent whose parents are desperately selling their story trying to convince the public he needs to go to a fancy private stage school to help with his AS because it helps with his concentration. its a convienient excuse to get what you want. (and i'm not questioning the authenticity of either diagnosis, just the use to which they have put it).

 

I know this is off topic again.But I have to say.My other half and I have debated the ethics of placing any child as young as 12 on stage in front of that number of people to be judged.But to place a child that is supposed to have ASD in that situation.Then to use the ASD as reason for needing funding for private stage school. Karen.

It does interest me that in this year's Britains got tallent ASD has featured in publicity for three contestants.

 

[baddad]

Staying completely with the 'off topic' topic, and saying at the outset that i have absolutely no knowledge of the story itself, only what's said here and a 'switch over quick' knowledge of the show, I fid the whiole thing disgusting.

Britain's got talent is a freak show. At the moment they seem to be trying to claw back some credibility by presenting some of the freaks in a slightly more positive light, as with that average-voiced-but-strange-looking woman they've been courting lately and a completely phoney 'wow - that was great' response to an old codger doing some embarrassing 'break dancing', that was remarkable only for the complete lack of any sort of talent, rhythm or dancing ability displayed. The only reason the woman got a warm reception was because she looked like Wayne Rooney in drag - her voice was in no way remarkable, just unexpected. And it was only unexpected because under normal circumstances the only reason they would wheel out someone who looked like Wayne Rooney in drag would be to point and snigger at them. Likewise, the old codger was applauded purely because he's an old codger - but so too are Bruce Forsythe and Lionel Blair; and while they hold no particular appeal for me they can both actually dance.

If this programme is making a point of including/refering to autism it is so people can go 'ahhhhhhh, bless' and patronise them. A year ago, they would have quite happily included people with autism, only without announcing the fact and so that the audience could have a few good chucks at their expense.

My idea of a really good 'talent' on BGT would be a dance troop doing a routine along the lines of 'Stomp'. The pay off would be that the dustbins they were keeping rhythm on would contain (In order of preference): Simon Cowell (1st) Pears Morgan/Amanda Holden (joint 2nd) Ant and Dec (joined-at-the-hip 3rd, sharing one dustbin) the studio audience (4th) the home audience (5th) the people who commisioned it and the exec's who green lighted it (6th) Graham Norton & That West Country ninny bloke with the chinny-beard off of 'Take Away' (nothing to do with BGT I know, but boy do they deserve it! (7th) Grandads who breakdance (8th) Grandads who break wind (9th) Grandads who break wind while breakdancing (10th)... accherly - I'd quite like to see the last one , so lets put in Wayne Rooney instead. As for the strange wayne rooney lookee likee lady: leave her alone - she's not hurting anyone, bless her

 

[bid]

Ooooh, don't get me started with B(N)GT!!

 

Of many things I find disturbing (if they are true) one that really concerns me is that Susan Boyle was reported as having LDs. I do feel that on the rare ocassion I have been made to watch by my girlies I did feel that here was someone who, at the very least, was exceptionally naive, being goaded to 'perform'...not particularly her singing (agree BD, not actually remarkable at all) but more being encouraged to 'gyrate' for Piers M

 

As for the little boy...from my area!!

 

Boho :grouch:

 

[Karen A]

Ooooh, don't get me started with B(N)GT!!

 

Of many things I find disturbing (if they are true) one that really concerns me is that Susan Boyle was reported as having LDs. I do feel that on the rare ocassion I have been made to watch by my girlies I did feel that here was someone who, at the very least, was exceptionally naive, being goaded to 'perform'...not particularly her singing (agree BD, not actually remarkable at all) but more being encouraged to 'gyrate' for Piers M

 

As for the little boy...from my area!!

 

Boho :grouch:

 

Hi.I was very embarrassed myself.I followed the coverage of Susan Boyle this week.I have gone from surprise and amusement that someone who could not in my opinion sing very well had done so well in the competition to concern that she appeared vulnerable and something was not quite right to discovering that she may have LDs and is probably a very vulnerable individual who is being exploited by people who do not care what happens to her.

Some of the coverage of other contestants is just as worrying.A young singer in obvious distress was left with minimal moral support when told that they had gone out of the competition and stood on stage in tears.It was upsetting to watch.Karen.

 

[Karen A]

Staying completely with the 'off topic' topic, and saying at the outset that i have absolutely no knowledge of the story itself, only what's said here and a 'switch over quick' knowledge of the show, I fid the whiole thing disgusting.

Britain's got talent is a freak show. At the moment they seem to be trying to claw back some credibility by presenting some of the freaks in a slightly more positive light, as with that average-voiced-but-strange-looking woman they've been courting lately and a completely phoney 'wow - that was great' response to an old codger doing some embarrassing 'break dancing', that was remarkable only for the complete lack of any sort of talent, rhythm or dancing ability displayed. The only reason the woman got a warm reception was because she looked like Wayne Rooney in drag - her voice was in no way remarkable, just unexpected. And it was only unexpected because under normal circumstances the only reason they would wheel out someone who looked like Wayne Rooney in drag would be to point and snigger at them. Likewise, the old codger was applauded purely because he's an old codger - but so too are Bruce Forsythe and Lionel Blair; and while they hold no particular appeal for me they can both actually dance.

If this programme is making a point of including/refering to autism it is so people can go 'ahhhhhhh, bless' and patronise them. A year ago, they would have quite happily included people with autism, only without announcing the fact and so that the audience could have a few good chucks at their expense.

My idea of a really good 'talent' on BGT would be a dance troop doing a routine along the lines of 'Stomp'. The pay off would be that the dustbins they were keeping rhythm on would contain (In order of preference): Simon Cowell (1st) Pears Morgan/Amanda Holden (joint 2nd) Ant and Dec (joined-at-the-hip 3rd, sharing one dustbin) the studio audience (4th) the home audience (5th) the people who commisioned it and the exec's who green lighted it (6th) Graham Norton & That West Country ninny bloke with the chinny-beard off of 'Take Away' (nothing to do with BGT I know, but boy do they deserve it! (7th) Grandads who breakdance (8th) Grandads who break wind (9th) Grandads who break wind while breakdancing (10th)... accherly - I'd quite like to see the last one , so lets put in Wayne Rooney instead. As for the strange wayne rooney lookee likee lady: leave her alone - she's not hurting anyone, bless her

 

 

Did you miss my thread on Mama Trish the other day then ?

I gather you are not him.

http://www.asd-forum.org.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=21460

Edited May 29, 2009 by Karen A

[bid]

That West Country ninny bloke with the chinny-beard off of 'Take Away'

 

That's just jealousy of his beard, that is!! Did you have a Saga moment and put your beard trimmer on the wrong setting again and not notice 'cos you weren't wearing your glasses??

 

Boho

Edited May 29, 2009 by bid

[NobbyNobbs]

If this programme is making a point of including/refering to autism it is so people can go 'ahhhhhhh, bless' and patronise them. A year ago, they would have quite happily included people with autism, only without announcing the fact and so that the audience could have a few good chucks at their expense.

in the shows defence, they haven't actually mentioned the autism. its onlyl because the parents have sold the story that its 'widely' known. i only found out when my mother announced to me that the paper was saying that he had autism. i've now dug up the article which states

Callum Francis, twelve year old from Herts who has overcome autism, and impressed the judges with his performance as the Artful Dodger from Oliver!

then i googled it and came across the main story which basically says that mother has been made redundant and they can no longer afford stage school. sister also of stage school (who also auditioned for BGT, but didn't get through) has already had her notice given in, but they're hanging on for callum because it helps with his concentration. it also says he's had a small role acting in casualty. now this may be my ignorance, and feel free to correct me, but i thought that to have an ASD, you had to have difficulties with social imagination... so how is this kid managing to act like the son of a drug addict to a high enough level to win a part on tv?!

[Karen A]

in the shows defence, they haven't actually mentioned the autism. its onlyl because the parents have sold the story that its 'widely' known. i only found out when my mother announced to me that the paper was saying that he had autism. i've now dug up the article which states

then i googled it and came across the main story which basically says that mother has been made redundant and they can no longer afford stage school. sister also of stage school (who also auditioned for BGT, but didn't get through) has already had her notice given in, but they're hanging on for callum because it helps with his concentration. it also says he's had a small role acting in casualty. now this may be my ignorance, and feel free to correct me, but i thought that to have an ASD, you had to have difficulties with social imagination... so how is this kid managing to act like the son of a drug addict to a high enough level to win a part on tv?!

 

Hi Nobbynobbs.

Whilst I understand that the show may have not mentioned ASD I would think they should have been told.If they know and have placed Callum on a show without adequate support where he is vulnerable as a 12 year old with ASD not mentioning it is hardly a valid excuse.

I have not got anything to say regarding the mother that would not sound critical so I am probably better not saying anything.Karen.

 

[baddad]

almost forgot (until ben got the tv remote tonight)...

Two more for the Stomp Bin - Hammond and Clarkson...

 

[bid]

almost forgot (until ben got the tv remote tonight)...

Two more for the Stomp Bin - Hammond and Clarkson...

 

 

But not that nice James May

 

Boho