one law for one
Trending Topics
24 June 2014, 04:33 PM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Berks
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is what it is. We live in a basically capitalist society, so those with more money are always going to be able to swing things in their favour.
24 June 2014, 04:51 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: I'll check my gps
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
24 June 2014, 04:54 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: I'll check my gps
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
24 June 2014, 05:27 PM
#18
I am all for conspiracy theories but what you lot are suggesting that a UK jury trial is corrupt! I agree that a top QC barrister will be invaluable in pitching the pertinent facts about the case. There has been massive hype and mis information about this case, but the judgement is what it is. The prosecution didn't have enough credible evidence to convince the jury re Brooke and her Co workers/husband
Mr Coulson well they did have enough to convince the jury.
Mr Coulson well they did have enough to convince the jury.
24 June 2014, 06:31 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
I am all for conspiracy theories but what you lot are suggesting that a UK jury trial is corrupt! I agree that a top QC barrister will be invaluable in pitching the pertinent facts about the case. There has been massive hype and mis information about this case, but the judgement is what it is. The prosecution didn't have enough credible evidence to convince the jury re Brooke and her Co workers/husband
Mr Coulson well they did have enough to convince the jury.
Mr Coulson well they did have enough to convince the jury.
How dare you say anything sensible in a thread frequented by the conspiracy theory crack pots and wannabee part time socialists.
Of course the PM personally threatened the jury with a bloody good beating from the SAS if they returned a guilty verdict.
And I'm shocked to find out that somebody with lots of money can buy a better house/car/barrister/doctor/architect/education
Perhaps I'm just really naive but I didn't think that was allowed
24 June 2014, 06:58 PM
#20
I am all for conspiracy theories but what you lot are suggesting that a UK jury trial is corrupt! I agree that a top QC barrister will be invaluable in pitching the pertinent facts about the case. There has been massive hype and mis information about this case, but the judgement is what it is. The prosecution didn't have enough credible evidence to convince the jury re Brooke and her Co workers/husband
Mr Coulson well they did have enough to convince the jury.
Mr Coulson well they did have enough to convince the jury.
I very much doubt there was any need for corruption was required by friends in high places; If there was any evidence, it would have been destroyed before the police even came calling.
Last edited by ALi-B; 24 June 2014 at 07:01 PM.
24 June 2014, 08:59 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: west yorks
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not just about the jury, but also throwing out evidence that could sway them before the jury even gets to see or here it, then discredit anything remaining with careful wording and interpretation.
I very much doubt there was any need for corruption was required by friends in high places; If there was any evidence, it would have been destroyed before the police even came calling.
I very much doubt there was any need for corruption was required by friends in high places; If there was any evidence, it would have been destroyed before the police even came calling.
24 June 2014, 09:07 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Berks
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
25 June 2014, 10:44 AM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coulson would have had top legal presentation as well....that isn't the differentiating factor for me.
It's likely that they didn't have the evidence as I don't think her connections would have swayed the outcome. Given the **** storm brewing over Cameron's relationship with Coulson him and others will have steered well clear.
It's likely that they didn't have the evidence as I don't think her connections would have swayed the outcome. Given the **** storm brewing over Cameron's relationship with Coulson him and others will have steered well clear.
25 June 2014, 01:01 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am all for conspiracy theories but what you lot are suggesting that a UK jury trial is corrupt! I agree that a top QC barrister will be invaluable in pitching the pertinent facts about the case. There has been massive hype and mis information about this case, but the judgement is what it is. The prosecution didn't have enough credible evidence to convince the jury re Brooke and her Co workers/husband
Mr Coulson well they did have enough to convince the jury.
Mr Coulson well they did have enough to convince the jury.
How dare you say anything sensible in a thread frequented by the conspiracy theory crack pots and wannabee part time socialists.
Of course the PM personally threatened the jury with a bloody good beating from the SAS if they returned a guilty verdict.
And I'm shocked to find out that somebody with lots of money can buy a better house/car/barrister/doctor/architect/education
Perhaps I'm just really naive but I didn't think that was allowed
Of course the PM personally threatened the jury with a bloody good beating from the SAS if they returned a guilty verdict.
And I'm shocked to find out that somebody with lots of money can buy a better house/car/barrister/doctor/architect/education
Perhaps I'm just really naive but I didn't think that was allowed
Coulson would have had top legal presentation as well....that isn't the differentiating factor for me.
It's likely that they didn't have the evidence as I don't think her connections would have swayed the outcome. Given the **** storm brewing over Cameron's relationship with Coulson him and others will have steered well clear.
It's likely that they didn't have the evidence as I don't think her connections would have swayed the outcome. Given the **** storm brewing over Cameron's relationship with Coulson him and others will have steered well clear.
dl
25 June 2014, 07:39 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Actually it does sort of make me proud. She may very well have been guilty but in this country we need to prove it beyond reasonable doubt to a jury of our peers. Obviously for whatever reason the prosecution never managed to do this.
Now this may mean that some guilty people get away with things from time to time. However it also means that not many people get banged up and taking it in the gary glitter from Bubba in the showers for crimes they did not commit.
We don't live in a country where we have trial by public opinion or politicians and I'm grateful for that.
So yes, it does actually make me feel proud to be British.
25 June 2014, 09:42 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
I don't understand the relevance of your question to our discussion and therefore can't be bothered to waste my time and everybody elses by answering it.
Or are you just trying to say that compared to you I am stupid, under educated, naive, sheltered, uninformed, poorly read etc
I'll let you think about the answer to that one (LOL)
