Sutil will stand trial in a German court later this month

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

There is no issue here as has already been explained:
I fail to see any reason to even raise the issue of being "charged with contempt" :dozey:

---

Explain that to Wilco .
He brought it up .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Explain that to Wilco .
He brought it up .

---

Who's Wilco Bigone?

Sorry .
I forgot you didn't like being called that , SGWilco .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

What's the word for your accusation regarding Lewis withholding information then?

Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk

---

I have asked our lawyer what the consequences would be if this is the case .
I have not "accused" anyone .

I would think that the word to which you refer would be "contempt" , but I'm sure he would be able to shed proper light on it .
Mind you , going by his flag , he's not a German lawyer , but this is not to say he wouldn't know .

Man, this is a load of BS!

Sutil has his knickers in a twist about something and starts slandering Lewis. AFAIK, Lewis has not dignified a response or lowered himself to Sutil's level.

Lewis has complied with the Courts, has submitted a written statement but was not required to attend. If he had of been required, he would have done but the court obviously thinks there is nothing to be gained from him being there. They probably viewed the tape and concluded he wouldn't have been any help otherwise would have required his pressence.

The only person that has done anything wrong as I can see it is Sutil who has been convicted of a serious crime yet a certain member seems detirmined to spin something negative about Lewis from this where he appears from all the information at hand to be entirely innocent of any wrongdoing.

It's getting really quite embarrassing the lengths people will go to in order to find any piece of crap that they can chuck at Lewis. Pretty sad really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Sorry .
I forgot you didn't like being called that , SGWilco .

---

Maybe you genuinely are not able to read my forum name, but there is no c, it is a k.

Should you have gone to specsavers?

However, once you learn to differenciate a c from a k, then Wilko will be fine and dandy..

Roger, Wilko & out.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

I have not "accused" anyone .

---

I'm not saying you have Bagwan, but the list of your "speculation" designed to implicate Hamilton is extensive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Could it be that Lewis was going to lie about the situation to the judge ? Or , could it be that Lewis was being pressured by someone to not attend ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

we must not have the real answer to why he didn't show up at the trial .

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

He said he saw nothing . Isn't it more likely that was the lie

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

However , if he is summoned to the appeal , it will fit nicely with my theory that he may have lied .

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

'SGWilko' with a 'k'. Just look at his name tab.

Rather than insinuating things without using the correct terminology and doing a U-turn when people suggest your suspicions, what is your gut instinct bagwan? I'm not against you having an opinion but what do you think Lewis really did in this situation. Your asking the questions so naturally I think you are suspicious of Hamiltons motives.


Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk

---

[Ridiculous sarcasm mode]Well, he is one of them, so he has to be guilty of something, right?[/Ridiculous sarcasm mode]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

I have asked our lawyer .

---

I asked mine too, but he would not furnish me with an answer until;

I'd bought him lunch at an expensive restaurant (which he will bill me for later no doubt)
I pay a stupid sum of money

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

'SGWilko' with a 'k'. Just look at his name tab.

Rather than insinuating things without using the correct terminology and doing a U-turn when people suggest your suspicions, what is your gut instinct bagwan? I'm not against you having an opinion but what do you think Lewis really did in this situation. Your asking the questions so naturally I think you are suspicious of Hamiltons motives.


Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk

---

Sorry , SGWilko . So concerned with getting the "SG" in there , apparently , I couldn't read .

"Accusation" was the word with which I had an issue .

I am , indeed , suspicious of Hamilton's stated motive for not appearing at the trial as it doesn't fit with the amount of ferocity in the statements from the Sutils .
One possible reason is that the statement that he saw nothing could be contradicted in court .
Another possibility is that he was pressured by someone to not appear .

He was reported to be one of four who were to attend . He was the only one to not appear .
Adrian's manager says he's crucial to making the judge understand .

It could be that the Sutil lawyers only now think that his testimony is crucial , but something would have had to have happened to prompt such action . Maybe they were surprised at the judge not taking the CCTV footage more seriously ?
It could be that they were surprised at the court not allowing a written statement . That could be a possibilty that would explain almost everything .
But , if that was the case wouldn't the Sutils have directed thier anger at the court , rather than at Lewis ?