Today I'm angry about.....

[Prufrock]

Really ??

You haven't got anywhere near enough evidence to say that he did, or or that he didn't, murder her with any conviction or rationale, and I've got as much evidence as you

Really ??

As you said earlier, we're only about five witnesses in, yet already Stumpy O'Legs McNolegs (last place in the Market Harborough half marathon) has had his version of events shot to pieces. I look forward to telling you that I told you so.

Ahem .

We're five witnesses into the prosecution. Of course all their witnesses say he did it, they're not likely to call anyone who says he didn't are they? If the defence went first, all we'd have heard would be witnesses talking about his great character, witnesses with recollections of the events which indicate he didn't do it, and forensic arguments saying he had to have been on his stumps when he kicked the door down.

What evidence is it you find particularly compelling? Because whilst I've seen plenty evidence that could indicate he did it, none of it is compelling, none of it is free of doubt, and none of it has been addressed by the defence calling their own witnesses.

It may well turn out he obviously did it, but there isn't enough evidence yet!

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Really ??

You haven't got anywhere near enough evidence to say that he did, or or that he didn't, murder her with any conviction or rationale, and I've got as much evidence as you

Really ??

As you said earlier, we're only about five witnesses in, yet already Stumpy O'Legs McNolegs (last place in the Market Harborough half marathon) has had his version of events shot to pieces. I look forward to telling you that I told you so.

Ahem .

We're five witnesses into the prosecution. Of course all their witnesses say he did it, they're not likely to call anyone who says he didn't are they? If the defence went first, all we'd have heard would be witnesses talking about his great character, witnesses with recollections of the events which indicate he didn't do it, and forensic arguments saying he had to have been on his stumps when he kicked the door down.

What evidence is it you find particularly compelling? Because whilst I've seen plenty evidence that could indicate he did it, none of it is compelling, none of it is free of doubt, and none of it has been addressed by the defence calling their own witnesses.

It may well turn out he obviously did it, but there isn't enough evidence yet!

I refer you back to a post I posted within the hour, which you seem to have ignored ^^^ back up there on the previous page. That evidence all by itself without the need to hear people's 'opinions' tells me that his version of events is pure bullshit. You don't need people witnessing stuff when physics can do it for you.

[bobo the clown]

There's only one way to sort this out ..... have a trial, within the confines of local jurisdiction and let the experts and the witnesses speak and have the evidence judged.

I think that is the way to go.

Maybe I'm wrong.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

There's only one way to sort this out ..... have a trial, within the confines of local jurisdiction and let the experts and the witnesses speak and have the evidence judged.

I think that is the way to go.

Maybe I'm wrong.

spoilsport...

[BWFC_Insane]

This is my point though. Everyone has access to every little detail, but without the necessary understanding or context.

So everyone forms an opinion whether they vocalise it or not.

From a totally non legal view, my feeling is anyone, anywhere who knowingly shoots a human being through a locked door should go to prison for a very very long time.

And he did do that. Unquestionably.

[bobo the clown]

Oh, don't get me wrong. I think he's as guilty as sin. Just as I thought OJ Simpson was ... even after a, so called 'fair', trial. But sitting here watching edited TV highlights and then deciding we're Perry Mason in a system we don't even understand.... and worse still then arguing with people as though we're experts is simply bllx.

[BWFC_Insane]

Oh, don't get me wrong. I think he's as guilty as sin. Just as I thought OJ Simpson was ... even after a, so called 'fair', trial. But sitting here watching edited TV highlights and then deciding we're Perry Mason in a system we don't even understand.... and worse still then arguing with people as though we're experts is simply bllx.

Indeed, but you can't blame people for it, when every detail is relayed (and often incorrectly) by the media in this way.

It is natural human reaction.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Oh, don't get me wrong. I think he's as guilty as sin. Just as I thought OJ Simpson was ... even after a, so called 'fair', trial. But sitting here watching edited TV highlights and then deciding we're Perry Mason in a system we don't even understand.... and worse still then arguing with people as though we're experts is simply bllx.

Surely all we're doing is expressing an opinion. I know Kinty says we shouldn't be, but that is all we are doing isn't it? I don't think anyone's claiming to be an expert. I'm not (at least not in this field, now if we were arguing about some obscure Sumerian antediluvian monarch, that'd be another matter).

[bobo the clown]

Yep ... 100%

But realise that it's barely informed reaction rather than take on the guise of an expert and then fall out with people who you judge to be less expert than yourself.

Nowt wrong with a bit of ill-informed sweeping judgement. Just see it for what it is.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Anyway, I've got another thing to be angry about, and this time it's legitimate, totally TW related, anger, and that's kinty's new identity. I'm not talking about the revolving thing, which somebody quite rightly has already complained about, even though it does give me motion sickness while sat sitting not moving. Oh no, far more insidious than that is his name!. whereas before, when talking about him (behind his back) you could jocularly refer to him as Verbs, and then kinty, there is just no feckin way to similarly shorten/personalise KeyserSoze. Soz doesn't do it for me, and neither does Keys, or any other combination. Fume.

[Athers]

Summary on the radio last night was saying how the door was taken off its hinges and policemen were just standing on it etc. as they were stomping around. Also that the fragments of door were never recovered. I remember the first investigating officer was an idiot as well. Incredible stuff from the SA police. If there's much more of this incompetence I presume it could get him cleared on technical grounds regardless of what the story looks like?

[Gary the Enfield]

Anyway, I've got another thing to be angry about, and this time it's legitimate, totally TW related, anger, and that's kinty's new identity. I'm not talking about the revolving thing, which somebody quite rightly has already complained about, even though it does give me motion sickness while sat sitting not moving. Oh no, far more insidious than that is his name!. whereas before, when talking about him (behind his back) you could jocularly refer to him as Verbs, and then kinty, there is just no feckin way to similarly shorten/personalise KeyserSoze. Soz doesn't do it for me, and neither does Keys, or any other combination. Fume.

KS

De Nada

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Anyway, I've got another thing to be angry about, and this time it's legitimate, totally TW related, anger, and that's kinty's new identity. I'm not talking about the revolving thing, which somebody quite rightly has already complained about, even though it does give me motion sickness while sat sitting not moving. Oh no, far more insidious than that is his name!. whereas before, when talking about him (behind his back) you could jocularly refer to him as Verbs, and then kinty, there is just no feckin way to similarly shorten/personalise KeyserSoze. Soz doesn't do it for me, and neither does Keys, or any other combination. Fume.

KS

De Nada

hmmmmm.

[boltonboris]

I think it's fair to say that most of us would be shit on a jury

[Bruce Rioja]

I think it's fair to say that most of us would be shit on a jury

That's a point - has anyone been called up for it? I haven't but Our Kid has. All the cases were just boring shite when he did it though. Nowt juicy at all.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I think it's fair to say that most of us would be shit on a jury

That's a point - has anyone been called up for it? I haven't but Our Kid has. All the cases were just boring shite when he did it though. Nowt juicy at all.

Nope, never. I think I'm on a blacklist somewhere.

[BWFC_Insane]

I think it's fair to say that most of us would be shit on a jury

Not fair to say because on a jury we'd be sat in court, day after day hearing every detail from every witness and every piece of evidence being scrutinised. Then we'd take our evidence packs away and debate our thoughts before reaching a verdict.

I think it is fair to say that some people would be shit on a jury but I reckon most people on here would actually be pretty good when compared against the average.

Hoboh excepted of course.

[boltonboris]

Aye, but what I mean is; we're all sat here looking at the evidence and as black and white, judging that he's done it. In legal terms it's not like that.

There isn't the option of do yo think he did or didn't. It's about being dismissive of certain evidence, because it has a loophole.

Personally, my opinion would override the justice system and I don't think I'm alone in that as 'evidenced' above..

[boltonboris]

I know what I'm trying to say.. I'm just not saying it very well

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

I think it's fair to say that most of us would be shit on a jury

Not fair to say because on a jury we'd be sat in court, day after day hearing every detail from every witness and every piece of evidence being scrutinised. Then we'd take our evidence packs away and debate our thoughts before reaching a verdict.

I think it is fair to say that some people would be shit on a jury but I reckon most people on here would actually be pretty good when compared against the average.

Hoboh excepted of course.

Personally I'd struggle to pay much attention beyond the first hour. The tediousness of the cross examinations would be too much for me.