[Goku]

Search & Destroy, on 31 October 2024 - 08:09 AM, said:

I?m no legal expert, it was my understanding that to charge someone police would gather evidence and present that to the CPS to make a decision on whether to charge

The CPS are under pressure to get through this workload so how were folk arrested on the Sunday and in court the Tuesday?

I get they plead guilty at court, but how did the police present their evidence and the CPS (who have a massive caseload) have time to sit, review the evidence, recommend the charges and get the case before a court in less than 48 hours?

Presumably because most if not all were open and shut cases. And presumably a lot of overtime was offered and taken up.

Really feels like some people don't want to understand things.

[Snowflake McBedwetter]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 31 October 2024 - 06:37 AM, said:

I agree.

Let those with "functioning minds" decide who's desperately piggy backing a tragedy to promote prejudice and division, who's telling bare faced lies about cretins arrested for stuff they'd get the same at any Town game, who's hysterically chucking slurs instead of facts, who's deserving shame as a result and who's on the right side of the argument.

Or as they're otherwise known, the moral majority,..

So, by your 'logic'...

If there is no two tier system as you claim, and as you rightly point out people would be arrested and promptly charged for shouting abuse at the police and being disorderly at a town match...

What would happen to people at a town match who beat up a couple of coppers/bobbies!?

Please don't feel the need to spew another load of condescending moral majority b*llocks in lieu of actually answering another example that you previously asked for! Again. It would be a waste of your time.

ps. It's a pretty twisted morality that chooses to stand beside a bloke who breaks a womans nose. But I'm sure if you try hard enough you'll be able to perform the necessary mental gymnastics to make it work for you. Maybe if you picture her wearing a pair of Union Jack shorts and reading a copy of the Daily Mail it'll be a less bitter pill to swallow.

This post has been edited by Snowflake McBedwetter: 31 October 2024 - 10:37 AM

[Misnomer]

Snowflake McBedwetter, on 30 October 2024 - 07:57 PM, said:

You're not siding with the thin blue line though, are you?

There is no complexity. Punching female police officers in the face, on camera!? Not to mention the other assaults.But you focus on the copper, who wrongly, but to some degree understandably booted one of the assailants in the head. As did the media initially.

If you are saying you can't see the blatant two-tier approach then you're a barefaced liar. Simple as that.

Personally, I think you can see it just fine, you're just so bound up in ideology and side picking you're unable to cede any ground. You're as bad as the opposite extreme and equally culpable for stoking unrest in that sense.

I've been saying your last paragraph for a long time. The ignorance and arrogance astounds me; completely oblivious to how their perspective and distribution of their divisive agenda actually fans the flames of unrest. As you say, entrenched ideologue.

[Misnomer]

calvin plummers socks, on 30 October 2024 - 09:35 PM, said:

Stop being so racist

Go on, I'll bite....which part of it?




No one was jailed for shouting at a police dog- stop being so stupid

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Snowflake McBedwetter, on 31 October 2024 - 09:58 AM, said:

So, by your 'logic'...

If there is no two tier system as you claim, and as you rightly point out people would be arrested and promptly charged for shouting abuse at the police and being disorderly at a town match...

What would happen to people at a town match who beat up a couple of coppers/bobbies!?

Please don't feel the need to spew another load of condescending moral majority b*llocks in lieu of actually answering another example that you previously asked for! Again. It would be a waste of your time.

ps. It's a pretty twisted morality that chooses to stand beside a bloke who breaks a womans nose. But I'm sure if you try hard enough you'll be able to perform the necessary mental gymnastics to make it work for you. Maybe if you picture her wearing a pair of Union Jack shorts and reading a copy of the Daily Mail it'll be a less bitter pill to swallow.

Why so personal?

Why so hostile to the mention of morals?

I mean, all I did was agree folk with functioning brains should decide right and wrong.

But let's not play games; you're one of a handful on here trying to turn the Manchester thing into a totem somehow proving 'two tier' conspiracy theories. Ignoring, with fingers shoved deep into ears and eyes squeezed tightly shut, every reasonable suggestion it's not as clear cut as you insist.

In fact just like the majority of crimes pursued in our courts.

I'm glad you agree that morons behaving in a manner which'd get them banged up on a match day is more straightforward, though. Haven't there been numerous occasions when impromptu sessions have been convened to deal with football violence? Drug crackdowns? Other social disorder? At which point it's logical to conclude cases were inevitably delayed. Yet without these hysterical squeals of a biased legal system, of course.

Then we might discuss how wealthier folk can afford lawyers who string out proceedings or find loopholes in a way the less well off simply can't.

So the bottom line is there:s far more than a two tier approach in law. There're multiple tiers. Addressing multiple crimes. Surrounded by multiple evidence.

And please, save you perverse accusations of 'standing beside a bloke who broke a women's jaw'. That's just, to use your own term, a bare faced lie. Not to mention utterly hypocritical on a forum peppered with posts at best sympathising with, or at worst openly endorsing some of the worst vermin in the country...

This post has been edited by The Earl of Chesterfield: 31 October 2024 - 12:55 PM

[Misnomer]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 31 October 2024 - 12:53 PM, said:

Why so personal?

Why so hostile to the mention of morals?

I mean, all I did was agree folk with functioning brains should decide right and wrong.

But let's not play games; you're one of a handful on here trying to turn the Manchester thing into a totem somehow proving 'two tier' conspiracy theories. Ignoring, with fingers shoved deep into ears and eyes squeezed tightly shut, every reasonable suggestion it's not as clear cut as you insist.

In fact just like the majority of crimes pursued in our courts.

I'm glad you agree that morons behaving in a manner which'd get them banged up on a match day is more straightforward, though. Haven't there been numerous occasions when impromptu sessions have been convened to deal with football violence? Drug crackdowns? Other social disorder? At which point it's logical to conclude cases were inevitably delayed. Yet without these hysterical squeals of a biased legal system, of course.

Then we might discuss how wealthier folk can afford lawyers who string out proceedings or find loopholes in a way the less well off simply can't.

So the bottom line is there:s far more than a two tier approach in law. There're multiple tiers. Addressing multiple crimes. Surrounded by multiple evidence.

And please, save you perverse accusations of 'standing beside a bloke who broke a women's jaw'. That's just, to use your own term, a bare faced lie. Not to mention utterly hypocritical on a forum peppered with posts at best sympathising with, or at worst openly endorsing some of the worst vermin in the country...

Hysterical squeals?

Genuine question:

There's a guy at Hope Not Hate, not even had a visit from plod, who's tweet stayed up for at least a week which, without question, was inciting racial violence. How do you square that with the multiple cases that were of a similar nature or less, posted online, that then saw these people sent to prison?

[calvin plummers socks]

Misnomer, on 31 October 2024 - 03:39 PM, said:

Hysterical squeals?

Genuine question:

There's a guy at Hope Not Hate, not even had a visit from plod, who's tweet stayed up for at least a week which, without question, was inciting racial violence. How do you square that with the multiple cases that were of a similar nature or less, posted online, that then saw these people sent to prison?

Why don?t you grass him up to the Police?

[Search & Destroy]

Misnomer, on 31 October 2024 - 03:39 PM, said:

Hysterical squeals?

Genuine question:

There's a guy at Hope Not Hate, not even had a visit from plod, who's tweet stayed up for at least a week which, without question, was inciting racial violence. How do you square that with the multiple cases that were of a similar nature or less, posted online, that then saw these people sent to prison?

Hope not hate?


There?s diminished responsibility at play there

[oldgoat]

https://www.bbc.co.u...es/czxr8x5r2nro

A simple explanation or is it a conspiracy

[calvin plummers socks]

oldgoat, on 31 October 2024 - 08:50 PM, said:

https://www.bbc.co.u...es/czxr8x5r2nro

A simple explanation or is it a conspiracy

That should shut up the likes of Mercury (we hope) for a few days at least

[Town_Fan]

Goku, on 31 October 2024 - 09:54 AM, said:

Presumably because most if not all were open and shut cases. And presumably a lot of overtime was offered and taken up.

Really feels like some people don't want to understand things.

Open and shut cases? It seems not, it seems more like most were railroaded into guilty pleas. It seems one guy who didnt fall for this, despite tremendous amounts of pressure, has just been found not guilty and set free.

Funny how the first case of its type to be properly challenged has been shown to be the speech supressing witch hunt these types of cases are.

[Mr Mercury]

oldgoat, on 31 October 2024 - 08:50 PM, said:

https://www.bbc.co.u...es/czxr8x5r2nro

A simple explanation or is it a conspiracy

I?ll stick to the wider News medium.
I?ll read the Mail and GB News streams. I?d rather ignore the company?s views that provided a home and even an umbrella for the likes of Saville, Hall, Harris and Edwards.

[calvin plummers socks]

Mr Mercury, on 31 October 2024 - 10:15 PM, said:

I?ll stick to the wider News medium.
I?ll read the Mail and GB News streams. I?d rather ignore the company?s views that provided a home and even an umbrella for the likes of Saville, Hall, Harris and Edwards.

Yet suppers the Tories who knighted said Savile???

[Goku]

Mr Mercury, on 31 October 2024 - 10:15 PM, said:

I?ll stick to the wider News medium.
I?ll read the Mail and GB News streams. I?d rather ignore the company?s views that provided a home and even an umbrella for the likes of Saville, Hall, Harris and Edwards.

Brainwashed

[Search & Destroy]

FWIW I think the disturbances post Southport were a culmination of events

We?d just witnessed the soldier in Colchester hacked in broad daylight
The Bournemouth murders
Similar events in Germany
The Batley school
Beheadings in France
Lee Rigby
Manchester Arena
Unprecedented boat crossings and hotels full of migrants
Scrapping of Rwanda
Grooming and rape of 100s maybe 1000s of children
Etc etc


Then the cold blooded murder of three children attending a Taylor Swift dance party

Folk took to the streets and it turned ugly

Then branded right wing racists while the appeasement continued

The reluctance to tackle, debate and acknowledge the threat posed by Islam will ensure the next General Election won?t be fought on the NHS and equality in society

It will be a straight shoot out between reform and a coalition of everyone else

A 48/52 Brexit style event that will lead the country more divided than ever unfortunately

This post has been edited by Search & Destroy: 01 November 2024 - 07:45 AM

[Mr Mercury]

Goku, on 01 November 2024 - 12:03 AM, said:

Brainwashed

Enlightened.

[Goku]

Mr Mercury, on 01 November 2024 - 07:58 AM, said:

Enlightened.

Radicalised

[Mr Mercury]

Goku, on 01 November 2024 - 08:53 AM, said:

Radicalised

Sensitised

[PontePete]

Homogenised (just joining in)

[Misnomer]

Why is it the same people, who fully support the incarceration of individuals for writing their opinions on social media or verbally protest2ing (racist or inciting violence, etc), seem to not want to apply the same disproportionate levels of imprisonment to the pro Palestine/Hamas/Hezbollah lot who, of which, many have been witnessed shouting and writing the most vile antisemitic and racist comments, inciting violence and genocide, along with celebrating the death and rape of innocent Israelis?

Like this lovely lady:


https://www.theguard...o-gaza-comments


Obviously, no two tier?