Plain Talker Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Of course I understand that, I haven't suggested anything to lead you to believe that I don't understand that simple fact. Would you really think so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Oh no you didn't me old bucko...now you're chopping your own quotes and leaving out bits to try and distract from the truth of what you really typed. You're false, disingenuous and a charlatan. YOU typed the lot...not the little bits you're now back peddling with. This is what you typed: You imply that you have to be guilty to be arrested..poppycock. You can be arrested on suspicion...suspicion is not evidence. Evidence is only required when being charged. everyones chopped thier quotes at some time or another, I did it to enphasise the if. Nothing wrong in doing that. In what way am I back peddling?.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Would you really think so? I know so.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BananaSplit Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 These are the alleged charges.. why is it lame?? Are they? I could've sworn you said earlier that you didn't know what the charges were. How do you now know what the charges are? It was lame of you to ask me an abhorrent question when all I had done was show you how incriminating evidence does not assume guilt. Though I do see that you've now somewhat moved your goalposts to say incriminating evidence that is proven.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 These are the alleged charges.. why is it lame?? Are they? I could've sworn you said earlier that you didn't know what the charges were. How do you now know what the charges are? It was lame of you to ask me an abhorrent question when all I had done was show you how incriminating evidence does not assume guilt. Though I do see that you've now somewhat moved your goalposts to say incriminating evidence that is proven.... There are only a very small amount of people who know if, and what V has been charged with. A dozen or so, perhaps, at most, privy to this particular sensitive information. I'd lay good money on danot not being one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 No!.. I don't claim to know that. It is wishful thinking to expect that to happen based on incriminating evidence isn't it?. Iv'e never claimed that I knew for certain what the charges were. Anyone can be incriminated in anything which is why the accused is given the chance to defend the charge. Hearing both the evidence and the defence is what a jury base their verdict on. I could plant stolen property in someones bag - the evidence would be incriminating for that person, but it would not ensure a guilty verdict by any means. To which I responded.. What if they found level 4 child porn on your computer, what would be your defence??To which you responded A very lame response to me showing you how incriminating evidence does not assume guilt.To which I resonded These are the alleged charges.. why is it lame?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 There are only a very small amount of people who know if, and what V has been charged with. A dozen or so, perhaps, at most, privy to this particular sensitive information. I'd lay good money on danot not being one of them. Why don't you show me where I claim to know what the charges are. Back up what your saying PT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BananaSplit Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 To my knowledge it's child porn sex offences. Thats not to say it mind you.. time will tell. Above is your comment that claimed to your knowledge it was child porn offences. Hence why I asked how you know. Where do you get your knowledge from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Above is your comment that claimed to your knowledge it was child porn offences. Hence why I asked how you know. Where do you get your knowledge from? A tabloid newspaper, I'd bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 A tabloid newspaper, I'd bet. Look at the thread header. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.