Suffragette1 Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 It would be a pretty poor forum if nobody expressed an opinion, especially those not of the norm... It's poor form to judge people's guilt/innocence purely on the basis of a TV appeal too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Yes that's a fair point. There was the Tracie Andrews "road rage" appeal and Karen "we just want you hooommmmeeee" Matthews to name just two off the top of my head But only an idiot would judge people on the premise that because relatives and friends have been found guilty of a particular crime, it follows that in future cases they must be guilty or place too much emphasis on their press conference demeanour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I am but I am not denying that I have a gut instinct based on their behaviour. That's absolutely fine llamatron, provided that instinct is supported by compelling evidence. I admit it may be wrong but I don't know why people are having a go at anyone for saying that something fishy appeared to be going on. They might be right! They may well be right, they may well be wrong...and therein lies the problem, there's a natural revulsion to people being accused of crimes they haven't committed. So let's wait until the parents are charged and convicted before becoming over excited...why do the pitchfork brigade have a problem with that? They might one day find themselves accused of a crime and would be kicking & screaming if people pointed the finger at them on the basis of being arrested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 we are all aware of the limitations of the facts we have, but we are not discussing the facts we are discussing gut instincts. At the moment the fact is they have been arrested, so having the opinion that they were acting fishy is not unreasonable. Even before that it wasn't unreasonable, it is an opinion and no-one was suggesting we form a lynch mob! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Sampson Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 But only an idiot would judge people on the premise that because relatives and friends have been found guilty of a particular crime, it follows that in future cases they must be guilty or place too much emphasis on their press conference demeanour. Obviously. That was just illustrating why I was not suprised when they were arrested, because it is not uncommon or at least it appears to be not uncommon in cases such as this. I'm not for one moment saying that because Tracie Andrews was guilty then this pair must be too. For what its worth I thought they looked genuinely distraught, as presumably one would be after 6 of your children die in a fire, whatever the cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 That's absolutely fine llamatron, provided that instinct is supported by compelling evidence. They may well be right, they may well be wrong...and therein lies the problem, there's a natural revulsion to people being accused of crimes they haven't committed. So let's wait until the parents are charged and convicted before becoming over excited...why do the pitchfork brigade have a problem with that? They might one day find themselves accused of a crime and would be kicking & screaming if people pointed the finger at them on the basis of being arrested. someone has completely missed the point of the word instinct there! I think its an evolutionary thing. Gut instincts can save your life at the end of the day. I think the problem is there was no pitchfork brigade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Thats sort of what I was getting at a few posts ago when I questioned why some were getting overly precious about others simply stating an opinion. It's not about being 'overly precious', it's about rational thinking. I could ask you a challenging question..why are people spleen venting in their haste to lay the blame with the parents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Sampson Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 It's poor form to judge people's guilt/innocence purely on the basis of a TV appeal too. Nobody is judging, merely opining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 That's absolutely fine llamatron, provided that instinct is supported by compelling evidence. What you see as compelling someone else may not...you only have to read the "Do you believe in God" thread to be aware of that.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 It's not about being 'overly precious', it's about rational thinking. I could ask you a challenging question..why are people spleen venting in their haste to lay the blame with the parents? they weren't! The emotive language you are using is astonishing compared to the language of the people you are disagreeing with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.