Michael Winner shock revelation: He wasn't such a nice chap after all

 

Startling evidence has been uncovered that recently deceased Michael Winner may not have been such a nice chap after all. Shock! Horror! And a little chutzpah! What you are about to read may offend those who have held 'The Twat' in such high esteem TheBigRetort lifts the lid... A halo slips... Revealing the darker side of Michael Winner: whom we let... R.I.P himself.

 

www.Punch.co.uk Reproduced with kind permission of Punch Ltd. Copyright (c) Jon Paul Morgan

 

The Hung Voter: a history of prisoners' rights

The Representation of the People Act 1969 introduced a specific provision that ‘convicted persons’ are legally incapable of voting during the time they spend in prison. But should prisoners want to claim the right to vote anyway? TheBigRetort takes a judicious step back.

The denial of prisoner voting rights in Great Britain dates back to the Forfeiture Act 1870. Linked to the notion of “civic death‟, the Act literally executed the human rights of the convicted. Now seen by some modern liberal thinkers as archaic and uncivilised, they argue that citizens who have erred should not have their human rights excoriated.

 

In the other camp sits the hard-leaning saints of humanity the Victorian ‘victim’ mindset; which also wants its pound of flesh, and some.

Prison to the VM represents punishment 'only'; among which is the loss of civil rights. Part and parcel of that denial of rights is the right to vote on how civilisation itself is governed. After all isn’t the right to vote really a privilege of citizenship - and does not that citizenship bring with it certain duties? Duties which the offender has failed to fulfil by his or her actions. Chief amongst these: thou must not do foul deeds. This is why the right to vote is denied the prisoner.

But perhaps we misunderstand why such rights were denied in the first place... so let's take a little gander.

In 1832, men who owned land valued at not less than a tenner were allowed to vote. But following the Act of 1870 at common law a convicted traitor and felon forfeited these lands; the denial of a prisoner’s right to vote, therefore, is really a hangover from landowners who faced what was a property denial punishment.

 

We now live in the 21^st Century. But we have lost sight of how it came to pass that prisoners were denied the right to vote in the first place.

 

But as we move forward from the 19th century we should do so knowing that it was the loss of property rights and not the vote itself that denied the right to vote. No property no vote: simple.

If only that were truly so...

After the Criminal Law Act 1967 amended the 1870 Act, the Representation of the People Act 1969 introduced a specific provision: convicted persons whilst detained were legally incapable of voting - property or not.

 

This was later consolidated in the Representation of the People Act 1983. Whilst convicted prisoners (in custody) would not be entitled to vote, prisoners on remand were exempt from this electoral banishment.

The Representation of the People Act 1918 brought about changes to the general voter registration requirements and this further enshrined the loss of the right to vote for prisoners.

Even this action is misunderstood when it comes to the prisoner’s right to vote. Once registered, an elector remained on the roll almost indefinitely (unless they moved to a different place), as it was not annually revised. Under the 1918 Act however, new arrangements were put in place to revise the register twice a year following ‘house to house’ and other inquiries. Electors generally had to be able to prove six months residence - which they could not do if they were in prison.

The Act then enforced the denial of the prisoner’s right to vote simply due to the difficulty in recording such persons in prison; and something, incidentally, in a technological age, that we are now able to do. The denial of the right of the prisoner to vote is therefore largely misunderstood by government and the judgemental Victorian mindset electorate. It was the loss of home ownership status that denied the right and not the criminal act or punishment that followed.

But come to think of it: do prisoners really actually want the right to vote anyway? Given that a convicted persons address would be “care of HMP Wandsworth (or some other)” wouldn’t such an address be an indelible stain on a convicted person’s character - for all judgemental persons to see for good - or bad, as it happens? Any persons duly recorded would literally be placing themselves in the court of common gossip via the People’s PNC - for life.

No doubt ‘convict outing’ would infringe the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act and the Data protections Act. It would then lead to compensation claims by ex-offenders into the bargain.  Perhaps, the right to have X mark the spot at the polls even inside HMP is a first step, albeit to both offender and non-offender a very cautious one indeed.

Harry Bensley: 'boy' accompanied Iron Mask - named

The year was 1908. A Remarkable Wager. A man wearing an iron mask... Pushing a pram full of postcard photographs... Must find a wife along the way... Visit three towns in each county of England... Make his way around the world visiting each country and city on the list... And it would take 6-8 years... But the person who did it would win the princely sum of $100,000 An astonishing tale…. IF TRUE.

Following our findings into Harry Bensley, the legend who trekked through Edwardian England in order to complete an 8-year trek around the world ‘for a wager‘, we now present the identity of the young man who accompanied ‘Iron Mask’ on his remarkable journey.

His name was... William German.

According to the Western Times article we uncovered (18 April 1908), it was it was four months after the commencement of the trek that William German of Holsworthy rendezvoused with a man wearing an iron mask. It states:

“Master Wm. German, the son of Mr and Mrs S German, of Trewyn, left Holsworthy this morning with a horse and a new set of harness on route for Barnstaple, to join the man with the iron mask, who has decided to have a living van (sic) accompany him, with Master German as driver. A large crowd of children assembled to see young German off, everyone wishing him good luck and a pleasant journey round the world.”

The plan was to walk around the world, pushing a perambulator, living off the sales of postcards which recorded the event.

Young William German joined Harry Bensley six months before his 17^th birthday, it must have seemed like a daring adventure. How long he may have lasted on that 8-year trip before discovering it was a scam is currently unknown

Coming soon… the Harry Bensley Hoax Admission

　

Ciroc Vodka, Next Model Sponsorship, and the Mystery Hedge Funder

We recently highlighted the ‘banker’ who splashed out £71,000 on a drinks binge at a top London nightclub in one single evening - and with just nine money-making wannabees. Now, in our follow up exclusive, TheBigRetort  uncaps the bottle. At the bottom of the glass we discover a 'sponsored' jolly for  a top model agency and a publicity stunt gone awry. Our report pours ice on a little-known drink someone has styled 'Methuselah'...

What do a bunch of party-going models and a drinks firm have in common?  Answer: A give-it-large hedge fund owner with more money than sense.


To recap... It took place just off Oxford Street. In a club called The Rose. You may recall that this is the place (if you've got no soul) that was recently promoted by its gloating owners as the wannabe hangout of the embarrassingly wealthy.

And boy do we mean e-m-b-a-r-r-a-s-s-i-n-g.

The Rose has a thorn after all...

It recently made the Evening Standard and the Daily Mail and other 'tabs' when it was claimed by its owners--strange uh?--that one wealthy patron, himself the owner of a hedge-fund firm, blew a small fortune on drinks for his young all-male staff -  a paltry £71K for ten, what a Scrooge!!

According to the club's owners, the man who caused all the fuss  wished to remain anonymous. (So why draw attention to yourself by throwing £50 notes around the club 'like confetti' then?) However, ironically, and somewhat contradictorily, the club's publicity-seeking owners appear not to have understood that the announcement would garner some negative publicity.

Various blogs commented on the 'disgusting' behaviour of the individual concerned.

A witch hunt was recommenced against yet another 'banker' drunk on his plunder. (But he wasn't a banker. He was the owner of a hedge fund firm.) Or so it was claimed... 

The Rose Club promoters also presented a copy of what they insist was the 'check';  presumably to firm up the story for the (unsuspecting?) reporter who filed it.

Remarkably it revealed that the waitress got extremely lucky that night.

She received a £10,000 tip!  

The club owners' claimed that ‘Margaux’ on the bill was not in fact 'a real name'. But since our last post (in which we outed waitress ‘Margaux Nina’) she has posted a copy of the bill confirming the tip. 

So that’s that then?

Well, not quite… don't forget the models.

Next Models London celebrated what was the end of 'an amazing year' with an "exclusive" party for its models, clients and friends at The Rose. 
According to its Facebook page, Next Models Management also reveals that the event at the Rose Club, which took place when the hedge funder was also there, was sponsored by... wait for it, “CIROC vodka.” 

But, what' oh what is this: £44,400 was charged to the hedge funder's bill for a drink recorded as  “Ciroc Methuselah“. A drink that we could not find listed anywhere else other than on the club's 'check'. Odd that.

So, why would an extremely rich hedge-fund owner, who wishes to remain (partly) anonymous, invite negative publicity by spending £44,400 for a drink that was sponsored--presumably gratis--by the drinks manufacturer?

Strange behaviour for a news-shy multi-millionaire who did not wish to be named?

Or was it we ask a publicity s-t-u-n-t.

If so, hoodwinking the unsuspecting public is not a very good way to develop trust around a brand.

COMING SOON... ANOTHER SHOT OF VODKA

Man charged with lift fire murder

Jerome Isaac, 47, has been charged with murder and arson following the death of Deloris Gillespie, 73.

The victim was set alight after being sprayed with a flammable liquid when her lift stopped on the fifth floor of her apartment block.

The incident was captured on CCTV together with images of her attacker dressed as a pest controller who was seen entering the lift in Brooklyn, New York.

The video went white as the woman was set on fire.

Dorinda Thomas, 56, told the New York Post. "She was a wonderful lady, you understand."

Breaking News... Boris bus motorway breakdown

Following the much-publicised introduction of the new Routemaster bus, reports just in...  Boris Johnson’s new bus, named the “Son of Routemaster”, has broken down on a motorway just south of Luton.

The new Routemaster took the unscheduled stop leaving its driver looking forlorn.

The Routemaster, which has its hazard lights flashing, is flanked by police in a lay-by.

Rose Club Big Tip Waitress Unmasked

In our last Retort, we reported on the City hedge fund banker who received national publicity when it was revealed that he blew £71,000 on a single night out for ten in a London nightclub. Added to the largess he left a tip for one lucky young lady... of £10,000. TheBigRetort exclusive...


Since we ‘outed’ the lucky 'Rose Club' waitress at our last retort the recipient of the windfall has now posted a photograph of the receipt - showing a tip made out to her to the value of ten thousand pounds. Yes - TEN THOUSAND!

Who's the lucky girl, then?

TheBigRetort can now reveal that she is none other than "Margaux Nina".

Or at least this is the name under which she currently Tweets. "Wooooooop ahahahaha !!! ;-) watch out…" Ms Nina wrote in one tweet following the enormous tip. She even thanks the London Evening Standard, presumably for reporting on the tip?

Woooooop ahahahaha indeed.

Boris: Bus is in

The new alternative to the hated Bendy-Bus was seen on London streets today as LBC's Nick Ferrari, and former MP Michael Portillo put two very large bums on seats. 

Their verdict: a big thumbs up for Mayor Johnson's "Boris Bummer.".

The old Bendies never did find much popularity (except amongst fare dodgers) and if Ferrari and others are to be believed, the Boris Bummer is likely to bring in the punters due to its lighting and sleek glass design, which also manages to retain the heritage of the old much-loved Routemaster.

Will is be a success amongst the travelling public?

Fares ladies and gents, please.

The Rose Club Tipper

When newspapers recently reported the largesse of a mysterious hedge fund manager who is said to have frequented a London club where he spent £71,000 on a single evening out - TheBigRetort couldn't resist querying the bill...

The Evening Standard, together with the Mail and various additional newspapers of note recently carried a feature on the 13^th December that came in for a lot of scrutiny by we poor due to the amount of money that is said to have been spent, in a single evening, and by just one rich individual at a club styled 'The Rose'; and which (significantly) recently opened off Oxford Street.

On Thursday evening into the Friday morning the club is said to have played host to a big-spending banker and his cohorts - with more money than it seem sensitivity in what are arguably straightened times, for the many at least.

But is all as it seems in this remarkable story of riches to riches?

Apparently this right ‘banker’ (call him what you will) allegedly splashed out that night  like there were no tomorrows, or even mornings after for that matter. The Bachanalian soiree he threw for his grateful staff is said to have included a £10,000 tip to a lucky waitress, apparently hiding behind the nome de bottle “Margaux“. (More on which later.)

But readers can rest safe in the knowledge that this may be nothing more than a marketing campaign, a fiction, a leg-pull - with the sole aim of promoting what is ostensibly a new venue: The Rose Club.

In fact the questions the mainstream press should have asked--do they ever--is what was the name of this big spender, the real name of the lucky waitress who served this party, and why certain things on the bill do not, how shall we put it, tally? For instance, the receipt records a cover charge for ‘fifteen‘ guests and not ten. (Perhaps the group had additional ‘friends’ and the hedge funder and his team did not want their presence known. I wonder why?)

The Rose Club was founded by entrepreneurs Piers Adams and Nick House, who are no strangers to courting publicity for their various ventures surely. However, if the claim of a big-spending banker is to be believed, and it has been accepted as Gospel by many, the pair prove themselves to be maestros of publicity when it comes to new club openings.

Be that as it may....

Messieurs House and Adams claim the following was spent by the hedge fund individual that they did not name, and amongst his (just) nine guests (fifteen on the cover charge sittings note):

£44,400.00 on Ciroc Methuselah, Dom Perignon Rose Magnum £7,2000.00, Wahiki Coconut £1,120.00. Together with additional items and service charge £7,965.60 and a £10k tip to waitress ‘Marguax) (Apparently not her real name) the grand total was £71,000.60. Or the price of a garage in some parts of London.

But don’t be resentful…

A little birdy informs that this bill will fall under the scrutiny of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs because it contains the VAT number 107717911.

This number is registered to a company styled BLAYSET LTD and which was incorporated in December 2010. Blayset is yet to file accounts and the nature of its business is not supplied, but when it is HMRC would expect to see it ticking over quite nicely.

According to HMRC, the club, or Blayset, would have to register for VAT if its taxable sales were likely to be above the current VAT threshold. At the prices charged and achieved at the club this seems likely. The company will then have to apply VAT at the standard rate of 20% on the items it sells - such as food and drink - and the services it provides - this is known as 'output tax'. The company would then be able to reclaim any VAT it pays on purchases such as Dom Perignon - this is known as 'input tax'.”

The club’s owners will have to therefore send off to HMRC the difference between:

all the output tax it has charged
all the input tax is has paid on purchases

And the interest doesn’t end there...

What about tips? Well, that brings us to the elusive "Margaux".  The Inland Revenue takes a keen interest in tips, nevermore so than in a venue where high rollers drop fifty pound notes like confetti. The Tax Man is waiting to wash his boots in bubbly and will seek his cut from ‘service charge‘ (a tip or gratuity surely) and Marguax‘s £10k windfall, sadly.

According to Twitter, “Margaux” is actually the name of a waitress at the club. Remarkably though she makes no mention of such a thrifty group at the club that night, or the £10,000 tip the “Margaux“ on the receipt is said to have received.

In one Tweet she distances herself from the owners' claim by posting:
"Love my life , love my job, love my BF !!! What else ?? Nothing !! Amazing !! Hapiness (sic) thank (sic) to @TheRoseClub."

Nothing? Perhaps she is right.

[News just in... this was the same night as the Next Models' Christmas Party. See..http://blog.nextmodels.com/?p=4710]

Kepler 22b renamed: "Keptoo-toobe"

It was back in June 2010. The Kepler space telescope discovered over 750 extrasolar-planets culled from data that it had collected in its first 43 days of observations of the cosmos. Marked "candidates" - since then astronomers have gone on to confirm hundreds of planets orbiting alien suns light years beyond our own little solar system. But one planet alone has drawn the most excitement. We name it “Keptoo-toobe”.

The recent discovery by astronomers of an extra-solar planet designated Kepler 22b comes just one year after a treasure trove of stars was unveiled by the space telescope Kepler at NASA.

“This is the biggest release of candidate planets that has ever happened,” said scientist William Borucki at that time.

NASA expected only 50% of these so-called alien candidates to actually turn out to be real planets.

Kepler 22b, almost two and a half times the size of the Earth, has not only been confirmed as a real planet after moving through its third rotation around its parent star, it is also the most interesting, the crown jewel of planet hunting.

”Fortune smiled upon us with the detection of this planet," declared NASA scientist Dr Borucki. "The first transit was captured just three days after we declared the spacecraft operationally ready. We witnessed the defining third transit over the 2010 holiday season.”

But why was this the most ‘phenomenal discovery in the course of human history’ - ever - kept from the world for 18 months? 

Did the Vatican have something to do with it?

Will world religions fall?

After all the newly discovered Earth has been around long before God uttered the words that his chosen species would record in a book and pass down through the millenia: 'Let There Be Light.’

So that would have the Church in a right flap, right? 

The Kepler team came under fire by others in the science community last year for keeping 400 candidate exoplanets to themselves for later confirmation by other telescopes used by the same team. To confirm a ‘candidate’ three transit observations were required of the target star.

But if this was the ‘defining’ third transit, why was its discovery only mentioned… now?

Could the “2010” third transit be a reporting error? Or could there be another reason why NASA was slow to reveal to the world that this new world had been discovered?

That said, it would be very interesting to see a maths wiz work out the date of the first sighting, and the date of the second, which would give us the exact date of the ‘third event’.

So what has NASA been doing since that date?

NASA was stumped for a new name having tried a number of them - ’Earth Two‘ - nah. ’Vulcan’ - forget it! 'Borucki?' -  y’know the way it goes at NASA it's all up in the air…

And that is the reason why we have rushed to name the planet Keptoo-toobe.

Get it?'

　

　

People Before Profit

George Hallam, an economist at Greenwich University, has been nominated as the London People Before Profit candidate in the forthcoming bye-election in Feltham and Heston. But can he do it?

The challenge by Mr Hallam follows the death of MP Alan Keen (Labour), who passed away this November aged seventy-three. Mr Keen had been ill with cancer for some time.

The London People Before Profit movement grew out of what was the former Lewisham People Before Profit (LPBP).

People Before Profit was set up, not by politicians, but by community campaigners in South London who were angry about Government and political leaders who simply put the interests of Big Business before community need.

The London People Before Profit Party brings together a broad group of people of varying political backgrounds who are united under one banner, the People‘s banner: Community Need Before Private Greed.

Such was the rush to meet the qualifying deadline for the bye-election that the London People Before Profit emblem was overlooked and so will not appear on the ballot paper.

However, as London People Before Profit spreads its message across the London boroughs, the choice of Hallam as its candidate looks set to cause election upset.

At Feltham and Heston, George Hallam will represent the only political party to support the 2 million public-sector workers on strike this week.

Simply known as ‘the candidate from nowhere’ Hallam is now gaining much ground, aided with the backing of local union branches and, due to a lack of coverage by the national media, via public engagement on blogs, Twitter and Email, together with Facebook. The message is clear: Hallam is the people’s choice.

But can George do it?

The bold move by Lewisham People Before Profit gives some Hounslow voters the chance to choose a candidate for London who may soon answer that question.