Skip to content

Of course he didn’t

Reform activist who called Rishi Sunak a ‘f—ing p—’ did not commit criminal offence, say police

“Mere vulgar abuse” and all that. Wasn’t polite, wasn’t wise and all that, but not illegal.

20 thoughts on “Of course he didn’t”

  1. The point of it was enabling the left-wing legacy media to call him a “reform activist”. That’s why channel 4 hired him.

  2. I passed the news stand on my way out of Asda this morning. I can’t remember whether it was the Mail or the Express had a picture of Starmer and another Labour guy under the headline “Vote Farage Get Them.” Seriously that is the best reason that they can offer for voting Conservative? Not that they have anything useful whatsoever to offer, just that they’re not Labour and that they are slightly less shit.

  3. Having disdained all and every conspiracy theory that the internet has thrown up for 32 years, I now find myself utterly convinced that the plonker was a plant.

    Too stereotypical, too convenient and an accent that every middle class Lefty assumes the common weal adopt…

  4. He could have been charged with being a geographically-challenged twat.

    Poisonally I find Rishi more agreeable than Mr Keith Strimmer, Shadow Minister for Open Spaces and Grassy Verges.

  5. I’m no lawyer, but “Any crime can be prosecuted as a hate crime if the offender has either: (i) demonstrated hostility based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity…”. This looks to uniformed me like a case could be made here for hostility based on race. In the same news article “On Wednesday night Ofcom said it would not investigate Channel 4 over Reform’s claims that the activist was a “plant”. The watchdog said it had received over 270 complaints about Undercover Inside Reform, but said after assessing the complaints against the due accuracy, due impartiality and offence rules under the Broadcasting Code, “we have concluded that they do not raise substantive issues warranting further investigation”.”

    Anybody get the sense that there are some questions raised here about Mr Parker and his motives that nobody wants formally answered?

  6. dearieme said:
    “He could have been charged with being a geographically-challenged twat.”

    That was my first thought, that his racial slur was inaccurate (and I wondered whether Sunak could have an action for slander).

    But having looked him up, it’s more complicated; his parents were born in Africa, but his grandparents were from the Punjab, which was violently partitioned on Independence – his mother’s father from the part that is now in India, but his father’s father was from the part that is now in Pakistan.

  7. He was paid by the Con Party (remember what they did to Boris).

    That’s why Rishi had his little “Paki” speech ready for the evening news

  8. In all seriousness who would call Sunak a p**i unless they had a very strong motive to be filmed doing so? There are numerous factually accurate pejoratives available.

    LotusEaters has been covering this one quite well including how this actor has been busy scrubbing his social and professional media footprints. I am not surprised by plods unwillingness to look further into what, in other circumstances, would incur a fully-fledged six man raid on his home. Similarly I’m not holding my breath for Equity to give him the full Laurence Fox treatment. I guess some apparent racists can be given a pass.

    A British Ray Epps.

  9. “Anybody get the sense that there are some questions raised here about Mr Parker and his motives that nobody wants formally answered?”

    Well, I am sure in the Brave New World of Starmer’s Administration I am sure there will be a thorough investigation which will conclude that there is no case to answer

    Should be an interesting 5 years – I hope Labour voters enjoy it

  10. Stonyground,

    This election is about Reform getting some second places to Labour, so when the tide turns, we get Reform MPs. Or at least, that enough people see how big Reform is that they can build on it. Or maybe even, the Conservatives realise that a lot of voters want a certain thing, and change tack.

    I don’t actually believe the last one now, BTW. I don’t think there’s enough of the Philip Davies and Liz Truss types to do it. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if after this election, they think that the problem was not being socialist enough.

  11. It’s the British Rathergate. If CBS could use obviously fake documents to smear GWB 20 years ago – and get away with it; Rather still pops his head over the parapet from time to time as if he wasn’t a proven liar – why can’t Channel 4 use an obviously fake Reform activist?

  12. HoblinMango:

    “This looks to uniformed me like a case could be made here for hostility based on race. ”

    You forgot the part where it says “Any crime”. Not a crime means it can’t be a “hate crime”.

    Never mind that “hate crime” is a way for police to avoid arresting actually difficult criminals (they might fight back after all) because they’re too busy arresting peaceable people for “what he said to our Sean”.

  13. What do you think Undercover Inside Labour would find about anti-Semitism?

    I suspect they will shy away from the whole subject as a fair number of Labour supporters, or those whose votes they are desperately courting, are probably unaware of the fact that Sir Keir’s wife is Jewish.

  14. Since Paki is a nationality not a race, I’d agree it’s not racism.
    I would say, since the Pakistan High Commisioner’s car has the registration number PAK1, it can’t be an insult either.

  15. Of course ‘Paki’ in this context is racist. If there was any doubt, C4’s plant would have said something else instead.

    Plod failing to proceed means nothing. These mouth breathers claim flying a swastika at a march calling for Jewish genocide isn’t racist.

  16. If using the word ‘Paki’ in this context, then any use of the word ‘white’ in any context must be equally or even more racist. You’d be fortunate to find any person of that supposed skin colour who think they belong to a homogeneous “race’. Anyone here enjoy being lumped in with Italians or Greeks? Let alone USians!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *